Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 


L161— H41 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2015 


t^V 


https://archive.org/details/christianityscep03cong 


BOSTON  LECTDEES. 


BOSTON  LECTURES, 

1872. 


CnrJSTlANITY  AND  SCEPTICISM 

EMBRACING  A CONSIDERATION  OF 

IMIPOR'r-A.INrT  Tli^ITS 


OF 


CIIllISTIAN  DOCTHINE  AND  EXPERIENCE, 

AND  OF 

LEADING  TACTS  IN  HIE  LITE  OE  CHRIST. 


BOSTON : 

CONGREGATIONAL  PUBLISHING  SOCIETY, 


No.  13  COENHILL. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1872,  by 
The  Cohgeegational  Publishing  Society, 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  "Washington. 


boston: 

Stekeottped  -and  Feinted  by  Alfeed  Mudgb  & Sox. 


ao^ 

Qi4LfZ. 

V/.3 


CONTENTS. 


LECTURE  I. 


BY  REV.  GEORGE. F.  MAGOUN,  D.D, 


Pag»v 


The  Adjustment  between  the  Natural  Law  of  Progress  and 
THE  Christian  Law  


1 


LECTURE  II. 


BY  REV.  HARVEY  D.  KITCHEL,  D.D, 

Christian  Doctrine  the  Mold  of  Christian  Character  ...  49 

LECTURE  HI. 

BY  REV.  WILLIAM  F.  WARREN,  D.D. 

The  Christian  Consciousness;  its  Apologetical  Value  ...  67 

LECTURE  IV. 

BY  REV.  JAMES  H.  FAIRCHILD,  D.D, 

Moral  Law  as  Revelation 95 


LECTURE  V, 


BY  REV.  TRUMAN  M.  POST,  D.D, 


The  Incarnation 


. 123 


VJ 


COJVTENTS, 


LECTURE  VI. 

BY  REV.  TIMOTHY  DWIGHT,  D.D. 

The  Fourth  Gospel, — the  Record  and  Testimony  of  the  Inner 

Life  of  its  Author . • , 152 

LECTURE  VII. 

BY  REV.  ANDREW  P.  PEABODY,  D.D, 

The  Testimony  of  the  Apostles 200 

LECTURE  VIII. 

BY  REV.  KINSLEY  TWINING. 

The  Evidence  of  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  • , , , 223 
LECTURE  IX. 


BY  REV.  WILLIAM  E.  MERRIMAN. 

The  Limitations  of  the  Personal  Work  of  Christ  in  the  World,  254 


OnRISTIANITY  AND  SCEPTICISM. 


LECTURES. 


NOTE. 


The  first  ccPnrse  of  “Boston  Lectures”  treated  mainly  of  philo- 
sophical subjects;  the  second  was  chiefly  taken  up  with  themes  of 
Biblical  criticism ; the  present  enters  upon  a consideration  of  certain 
internal  evidences  of  Christianity.  The  opening  lecture  draws  an 
argument  from  the  general  character  of  the  Christian  system,  as  a 
S3^stem  not  merely  suited  to  our  wants,  hut  necessary  to  the  true 
progress  of  the  race.  The  second  considers  more  particularly  the 
connection  of  Christian  doctrine  with  the  progress  which  is  truest 
and  deepest,  — namely,  toward  perfection  of  character.  The  third 
brings  to  view  the  traits  and  the  significance  of  what  is  peculiar  in 
the.  Christian  “consciousness”;  and  the  fourth,  the  divine  excellency 
and  authority  of  the  Moral  Law.  The  five  remaining  lectures  are 
chiefly  given  up  to  a consideration  of  prominent  facts  in  the  life  of 
Christ:  beginning  with  the  incarnation;  then  discussing  the  unique 
testimony  of  the  Apostle  John,  in  his  gospel;  then  presenting  the 
witness  of  the  other  Apostles,  and  especially  of  Judas;  following 
this  with  an  array  of  facts  and  arguments  proving  the  resurrection; 
and  concluding  with  a comprehensive  review  of  the  whole  life  of 
Christ  on  earth,  its  most  distinctive  traits,  and  its^ total  significance. 


June  13,  1872. 


I. 


THE  ADJUSTMENT  BETWEEN  THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF 
PROGRESS  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


LL  parties  in  relation  to  Christianity  now  recog- 


nize and  affirm  a Law  of  Human  Progress  of 
some  kind, — its  champions  and  its  assailants,  and 
those  who  ignore  it,  or  profess  indifference,  as  well. 
It  has  come  to  be  a test  of  the  Christian  religion  itself, 
how  it  is  related  to  such  a law,  whether  in  fellowship  or 
in  hostility,  — independent,  auxiliary,  or  inclusive  of 
it.  If  there  be  a Natural  Law  of  Progress,  it  must 
be  other  than  that  affirmed  in  the  " Naturalistic  ” Doc- 
trine, controverted  by  Christian  thinkers  in  these  lec- 
tures and  elsewhere,  and,  as  it  seems  to  me,  success- 
fully. There  must  be  a possible  adjustment  between 
this  Law  and  the  Christian  Law,  since  both  are  of 
God.  This  adjustment  will  be  rational  and  satisfac- 
tory, saving  the  just  claims  of  each.  I attempt  here 
to  indicate  it.  But  this  Natural  Law,  if  found,  is  not 
to  be  found  in  civilization,  or  in  some  element  of  it, 
like  science  or  culture,  which,  in  a loose  sense  of 
terms,  are  said  to  necessitate  Progress  and  dispense 
with  Christianity;  for  each  of  these  is  plainly  an 
effect  of  the  Law,  and  a part  of  progress  itself,  not 


BY  REV.  GEORGE  F.  MAGOUN,  D.D, 


2 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


the  Law,  nor  the  cause  of  it : — a multiform  and 
indeterminate  effect,  too  ; while  any  cause  involved  in 
the  Natural  Law  which  we  seek,  is  determinate  and 
one,  as  that  involved  in  the  Christian,  or  extra -natural. 
Law  is  one.  It  has  become  the  fashion  with  many, 
to  cover  in  Christianity  under  civilization  as  itself  an 
effect  of  the  advance  achieved  by  mankind  twenty 
centuries  ago.^  But  I may  assume  here,  that  this  has 
been  refuted  ; and  that  the  Christian  Religion  plainly, 
and  par  eminence^  contains  a cause,  or  it  is  nothing. 
Positions  as  inaccurate,  and  therefore  harmful,  have 
been  taken  on  the  other  side.  Some  venture  or  are 
betrayed  into  the  extreme  and  hazardous  assertion, 
that  there  is  no  Progress  in  the  world  save  from 
Christianity  — no  other  law  whatever;  which  can 
never  be  accepted  as  part  of  the  evidence  in  its  favor 
by  those  who  do  not  accept  Christianity,  nor  by  the 
best  informed  among  those  who  do. 

The  multitudinous  discussions  and  varied  learning 
the  subject  has  called  out,  with  the  disclosures  Pro- 
gress itself  is  ever  making,  ought  to  render  the 
adjustment  proposed  easy  to  patient  and  careful 
thought.  And  it  is  a necessary  part  of  the  internal 
evidence  of  our  religion,  in  the  wider  sense  which 

* This  is  the  drift  of  much  that  is  now  said  on  the  Comparative 
Study  of  Eeligions.  Possibly,  some  may  suppose  that  even  if  Christi- 
anity is  treated  as  a mere  result  of  civilization  it  may  yet  be  held, 
of  supernatural  origin,  — civilization  itself  being  so  viewed,  in  the  last 
analysis,—  but  this  would  not  justify  the  claim  hitherto  made  for  Chris- 
tianity ; and  the  argument  for  that  claim  must  needs  be  so  obscure  and 
subtle  as  to  be  worthless,  with  ninety-nine  in  a hundred  of  intelligent 
men.  It  is,  as  supernatural  in  the  immediate' and  obvious  sense, 
that  its  friends  vindicate  the  Christian  Ueligion  as  containing  a Law  of 
Progress. 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


3 


that  phrase  has  acquired  in  our  day,  not  only  that  it 
brings  into  human  society  and  history  a Christian 
Law  of  Progress,  but  also  that  this  is  adjustable  with 
any  Natural  Law  that  may  be  shown  to  exist. 

We  must  start  with  determining  and  limiting  the 
meaning  of  the  well-worn  phrase  "Law  of  Progress.” 
It  is  not  employed  with  any  precision.  Certain  just  and 
necessary  distinctions  in  the  use  of  both  of  its  terms 
must  be  established.  The  very  word,  " Progress,” 
and  the  word  " Law  ” hardly  less,  is  liable  to  let  us 
out  into  a chaos  of  notions,  dogmas,  and  speculations, 
swept  by  currents  and  counter-currents  of  thought,  on 
which  the  likeliest  of  all  things  is  that  we  shall  lose 
our  way.  We  sail  for  port  to-day,  and  not  for  the 
open  sea.  We  may  not  find  this  or  that  harbor,  which 
some  or  others  look  for  expectant  through  wind  and 
mist,  but  we  can  find  one,  please  God,  with  good 
guidance,  in  which  we  may  anchor  and  ride  secure. 

I.  We  determine  and  limit,  first,  the  term  Pro- 
gress. (1.)  In  the  sense  of  the  improvement  of 
the  whole  state  of  things  on  earth,  a sense  often  min- 
gled with  the  proper  one,  it  offers  a theme  too  large 
and  indefinable  for  any  such  handling  as  is  possible 
here.  And  the  globe  on  which  man  dwells  might, 
supposably,  be  ever  growing  better ; order,  beauty, 
production,  use,  in  all  things  increasing;  the  ele- 
ments it  contains,  living,  organic,  and  inorganic, 
while  subject  neither  to  multiplication  nor  to  diminu- 
tion, coming  into  ever  superior  combinations,  through 
rational  selection,  or  some  conceived  " natural  selec- 
tion,” its  vegetable  and  vital  growths  assuming  finer, 
richer,  and  more  valuable  forms,  constantly  and  uni- 


4 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


ver sally ; in  a word,  everything  pertaining  to  the 
globe  and  its  other  occupants  advancing  ever  from 
more  imperfect  conditions  to  less  imperfect  in  all 
respects,  and  going  onward  toward  perfection;  but 
all  this  would  not  necessitate  progress  in  man.  It 
may  be  both  philosophic  and  Christian,  to  believe  in 
this  as  the  work  of  God  through  natural  laws.  But 
it  does  not  fall  within  the  present  subject.  If  man 
knew  all  this,  it  would  imply  his  advance  in  the  sin- 
gle point  of  knowledge,  without  question ; if  he  had 
a hand  in  effecting  it,  in  the  two  points  of  knowledge 
and  skill.  But  as  the  individual  man  is  often  sinking 
while  his  conditions  are  rising,  so  very  possibly  it 
might  be  with  the  race.  Mr.  Marsh,  in  his  well-known 
work  on  " Man  and  Nature,”  shows  the  immense 
waste  in  the  past  by  human  agency^  even  to  extirpa- 
tion of  organic  forms  which  man  cannot  consume.  lie 
shows  that  man  alone  is  an  essentially  destructive 
being ; that  ” as  he  advances  in  civilization  he  gradu- 
ally eradicates  or  transforms  every  spontaneous  pro- 
duct of  the  soil  he  occupies  ” ; that  another  such  evil 
era  as  can  be  traced  backwards  — making  the  world 
largely  ” an  unfit  home  for  its  noblest  inhabitant,”  — 
would  threaten  the  deprivation,  barbarism,  and  even 
extinction  of  the  species ; and  that  the  counter-pro- 
cess of  physical  improvement  in  the  later  centuries 
gives  thus  far  ” but  faint  hope  that  we  shall  yet  make 

*The  injuriousness  of  man  makes  other  agencies  injurious  that  were 
not  such  in  themselves  ; in  the  condition  of  barbarism,  he  begins  an 
indiscriminate  warfare  on  vegetable  and  animal ; during  the  two  thou- 
sand years  before  colonization  commenced,  conferring  no  benefit  on 
this  continent,  he  reduced  millions  of  square  miles  of  the  fairest  and 
most  fertile  portions  of  the  other  to  barren  deserts.  [See  Marsh.] 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


5 


full  utoncmcnt  for  our  spendthrift  waste  of  the  boun- 
ties of  nature.” 

Now,  this  might  be  only  the  sacrifice  of  the  globe 
to  the  dweller  upon  it,  the  lower  contributing  to  the 
improvement  of  the  higher ; and  even  ineffectual 
efibrts,  through  civilizing  agencies  to  save  the  loss  as 
well  as  secure  the  gain,  might  exhibit  Human  Pro- 
gress. Moreover,  a supernatural  interposition,  turn- 
ins:  " a fruitful  land  into  barrenness  for  the  wicked- 
ness  of  them  that  dwell  therein,”  might  be  a means 
of  such  Progress.  And  the  industrial  arts,  agricul- 
tural and  mechanical,  necessary  to  the  recovery  of 
the  world  — if  only  these  existed,  and  if  these  could 
exist  alone  — could  not,  save  by  such  Progress,  have 
come  into  being.  But  the  simple  enlarging  of  the  oc- 
cupancy and  cultivation  of  the  earth,  every  land  and 
island  of  the  sea,  even,  would  no  more  show  human 
improvement  than  the  emigration  of  farmers  into  the 
newer  west,  and  their  constant  migration  there  into 
newer  counties  with  the  same  implements  and  pro- 
cesses as  their  fathers,  would  show  advance  in  scien- 
tific farming.  We  Americans  ever  confound  mere 
territorial  expansion  with  progress.  ’ Comfort  and 
luxury  also  may  increase,  and  the  men  who  enjoy  them 
be  under  a doom  of  decline ; or  the  reverse  of  this  as 
easily  be  true.  Such  a doom,  the  late  Dr.  Nathan 
Lord  believed  to  be  fixed  of  God,  for  both  man  and 
the  world,  while  he  held  that  temporary  improvement 
in  things  is  still  possible,  and  is  pleasing  to  God. 
Mr.  Marsh  admits,  that  in  the  Old  World  no  species 
of  native  forest-tree  or  vegetable  is  yet  known  to 
have  been  quite  extirpated,  and  also  that  commerce 


6 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


and  agricultural  industry  now  depend  chiefly  on 
" vegetable  and  animal  products,  hardly  known  to 
Greek,  Roman,  and  Jewish  civilization”;  but  he 
indicates  the  probable  fact  " that  man  has  intention’- 
ally  transferred  fewer  plants  than  he  has  accidentally^ 
introduced  into  countries  foreign  to  them.”  What- 
ever shall  yet  be  done  to  turn  back  the  decay  of  even 
new  lands,  as  the  reckless  pioneer  wastes  and  harries 
them,  and  to  restore  immense  desolated  and  depopu- 
lated tracts  in  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  larger,  taken 
together,  than  all  Europe  is,  and  to  utilize  the  yet 
untouched  resources  of  nature,  must  bear  a certain 
definite  relation  to  the  improvement  of  man  himself, 
but  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  it,  as  is  almost 
universally  done.  Neither  the  Natural  Law,  nor  the 
Christian,  covers  any  such  supposed,  and  yet  future, 
improvement  of  the  earth,  or  of  the  whole  state  of 
things.” 

(2.)  Nor  is  what  is  known  as  ” development  ” in 
scientific  and  philosophical  circles,  the  same  with  Pro- 
gress, under  the  Natural  Law  or  the  Christian,  nor 
will  it  help  account  for  either.  Three  current  words 
are  now  largely  and  loosely  treated  as  synonymous  ; 
Progress,  Development,  Evolution, — but  synonymes 
they  cannot  be.  One  of  Herbert  Spencer’s  books 
confound  all  three  under  one  title,  "Illustrations  of 
Universal  Progress,”  as  his  thinking  there  and  every- 
where confounds  them.  Development  is  in  idea 
more  than  Progress,  and  Evolution  is  more  than  De- 
velopment. Progress  is  the  advance  of  any  being  or 

* “ Man  and  Nature,*  **  p.  63.  His  illustration  is  from  Thorwaldsen’s 

cases,  and  seeds  conveyed  in  them. 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


7 


order  of  beings  from  original  imperfection  towards 
such  perfection  as  it  is  capable  of,  — the  advance 
within  itself,  still  remaining  its  very  self,  i.  e.,  the 
same  being  or  order  of  beings.  Development  is  the 
supposed  transition  of  a being  or  order  of  beings  out 
of  itself  into  another.  Evolution  is  the  name  for  the 
principle  supposed  to  be  behind  each,  on  Tvhich  both 
alike  are  asserted  to  take  place ; the  end  being  to 
reach  and  realize  the  complex  through,  or  out  from, 
the  simple,  the  heterogeneous  from  the  homogeneous. 
On  this  principle,  the  wing  of  a bird  is  alleged  to 
come  from  the  fin  of  a fish,  or  a creature  having  a 
nervous  system  from  one  having  none,  or  a living 
being  from  one  without  life.  Development  is  trans- 
formation instead  of  improvement.  It  is  that  which 
Progress  is  not ; it  is  not  that  which  Progress  is. 
The  heterogeneous,  or  the  complex,  is  not  in  itself 
the  more  perfect, — at  least  not  in  human  history, 
though  it  is  fallaciously  so  taken  here, — for  we  often 
reject  it  as  less  perfect  for  our  purpose.  It  may 
always,  not  to  say  must,  contain  the  less  perfect : and 
the  simple,  the  homogeneous,  may  be  perfect  in  its 
kind,  so  far  as  its  nature  and  function  go,  diversity  not 
bettering  it  therefore  in  the  least  by  any  possibility. 
Even  of  a new  and  rude  machine,  we  must  know  some- 
thing more  than  this,  that  it  is  more  complex  than  an 
old  one,  or  we  do  not  buy  it.  We  judge  ” differentia- 
tion” ill  all  cases  by  another  standard  than  itself. 
Development  refers  to  an  imagined  change  of  nature 
in  things,  — it  is  nothing  to  the  purpose  to  say, 
whether  it  would,  or  would  not,  be  a proof  of  Divine 
power,  skill,  or  goodness.  Progress  refers  simply  to 


8 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


improved  activity,  use  of  powers,  or  discharge  of 
functions.  A bird  is  not  an  improved  fish,  but  a 
bird  in  place  of  a fish ; a man  is  not  an  improved 
ape,  but  a man  in  place  of  an  ape.  This  is  true, 
irrespective  of  the  origin  of  either.  There  is  no 
bettering  of  the  thing,  as  Progress  implies,  but  a 
displacement  and  a substitution,  — another  thing  in 
its  stead. 

It  is  supposable  that  all  things  might  have  been 
originally  heterogeneous,  — some  more  complex  than 
others,  some  less, — and  all  subject  to  Progress  by 
adequate  Natural  Law,  each  jprqpno  motu  in  its  kind 
and  order,  but  none  leaving  its  place  in  creation  and 
passing  over  into  that  of  another,  advancing,  all,  yet 
all  remaining  the  same.  The  hypothesis  of  Develop- 
ment (with  its  principle  of  Evolution  to  account  for 
it) , only  seems  to  be  a doctrine  of  Progress  by  an 
assumption  involved,  that  higher  species  are  more  per- 
fect than  lower  ones  for  the  purposes  of  lower  ones, 
or  can  only  be  obtained  for  higher  purposes  from 
lower  ones,  — as  if  a bird  were  more  perfect  for  the 
ends  of  a fish  than  a fish  itself,  or  a man  for  those 
of  an  ape,  or  as  if  these  could  only  be  got  from 
those, — and  by  its  fellow  assumption,  that  the  passing 
of  the  lower  into  the  higher  is,  or  propria  motu. 
I am  aware  that  its  advocates  assume  no  foresight  of 
greater  perfection,  prompting  the  passage  of  lower 
species  into  higher ; but  set  forth  the  complex  and 
heterogeneous  as  evolved  simply  for  their  own  sake, 
qua  complex  and  heterogeneous,  i.  e.,  blindly,  no 
reason  supposed : for  complexity  cannot  have  its 
reason  in  itself,  or  account  for  itself ; and  perfection 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


9 


aimed  at,  is  a reason,  while  complexity  is  a mere  fact 
to  find  a reason  for.  In  this  the  hypothesis  is  wholly 
mechanical  and  irrational. 

Whether  God  created  lower  species  in  any  realm 
of  nature  for  the  sake  of  the  further  production  of 
higher  ones  out  of  them  ; whether  man,  for  instance, 
comes  altogether  from  one  animal,  as  Darwin  holds, 
or  possibly  from  another  as  to  his  body  alone,  but 
as  to  his  higher  powers,  from  God,  as  Mivart  sup- 
poses ; whether  it  is  in  the  Divine  plan  at  all  that 
orders  of  existence  shall  ever  pass  beyond  the  lines 
of  their  class  and  mix  up  in  kind,  as  men  and  anthro- 
poid apes  mix  in  epochs  of  time,  — is  an  inquiry 
entirely  distinct  from  the  question,  whether  He 
provides  for  the  improvement  of  everything  within 
its  class,  and  for  that  of  the  highest  of  earthly  crea- 
tures most.  This  alone  touches  the  doctrine  of 
Progress.  The  affirmative  established,  would  fur- 
nish a Natural,  but  not  the  " Naturalistic  ” Law. 
Substitute  the  idea  of  Development  for  this,  and  it 
logically  follows,  that  some  diverse  and  superhuman 
form  of  life  and  power  shall  sometime  supervene 
upon  the  human,  as  if  an  invertebrate  animal  or  jelly 
should  transmute  itself  into  a vertebrate,  or  one  sort 
of  protoplasm  into  another,  or  cell  into  cell  unlike, 
and  so,  by  something  far  beyond  a "new  departure.” 
Man,  and  the  question  of  the  Progress  of  Man,  come 
to  an  end  together  ! 

II.  In  thus  distinguishing  from  Human  Progress 
some  things  that  are  constantly  confounded  with  it,  I 
must  not  omit  to  note  that  each  has  a certain  and  a 


10 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


different  relation  to  it.  (1.)  The  improvement  of 
the  earth  furnishes  a presumption  in  its  favor.  That 
the  conditions  of  the  planet  should  he  permanently 
elevated,  and  not  the  activities  and  functions  of  its 
chief  inhabitant,  to  whom  these  conditions  are  worth 
most  and  mean  everything,  is  incredible ; that  this 
should  come  to  pass,  indeed,  save  as  an  effect  of 
some  sort  of  improvement  in  him,  is  well-nigh  impos- 
sible. Inventions  do  not  altogether,  or  all,  account 
for  human  elevation,  as  is  imagined ; some  of  them 
do  not  look  that  way,  but  must  themselves  be 
accounted  for  by  man’s  deterioration;  many^  for  in- 
stance, of  those  that  subserve  over-estimated  lower 
uses,  all  of  those  that  subserve  vice.  But  many  others 
render  true  progress  eminently  probable.  That  not 
only  more  land  constantly  is  cultivated,  but  more  in 
proportion  to  the  population  of  the  globe,  and  better 
cultivated ; that  the  fruits  of  the  earth  in  use  have 
come  up,  from  useless,  harsh  or  acrid  originals,  to 
their  present  healthful  and  nutritive  qualities ; that 
one  of  the  grasses  has  been  improved  into  corn,  and 
the  flowers,  God’s  sweet  gifts,  made  sweeter;  that 
the  mean  temperature  of  cities  and  towns  is  modified 
from  that  of  the  open  country ; that  whole  lands 
soften  sensibly  to  culture,  as  North  France,  since 
Strabo’s  day,  and  that  even  Iceland,  where  inhabited, 
shows  a gentler  climate ; that  civilized  men  live  bet- 
ter, on  the  whole,  every  decade ; that  civilization 
shows  an  increasing  ascendency  over  rude  nature,  are 
examples  at  hand.  "We  now  build  our  barns,”  says 
one,  "better  than  medieval  saints  and  heroes  built 
their  houses.” 


4 

AND  THE  CURISTIAN  LAW,  11 

(2.)  The  Development  hypothesis,  again,  is 
based  upon  a well-known  truth  that  supports  both 
Laws  of  Progress  — the  Natural  and  the  Christian  — 
by  analogy.  The  whole  idea,  in  the  rough,  is  old 
enough.  Aristotle  argued  that,  among  animated 
beings,  at  least,  there  is  ”a  spale  of  gTadation  in 
which  they  ascend  from  lower  to  higher  forms,”  and 
Democritus,  two  hundred  years  before,*  that  crea- 
tion is  mere  transmutation  of  the  lower  into  the 
higher, 

“Smiles  oflife  through  nature  creeping, 

Serial  steps  progressing  ever.” 

Let  it  be  that  each  order  in  creation  joins  on,  without 
a break  in  time  or  kind,  upon  that  just  before  and 
beneath  it ; or  let  the  statement  Hugh  Miller  used 
to  make  be  correct,  that  the  geologic  progression  is 
not  from  individual  to  individual,  but  (in  both  human 
and  prehistoric  ages)  from  class  to  class,  by  leaps,  — 
the  earliest  varieties  of  each  species  being  the  most 
perfect  in  organism  and  form,  though,  looking  through 
the  whole  order,  the  earliest  species  are  ever  the  least 
perfect,  or^ — as  the  Edinburgh  Eeview  once  put  it 
— ” in  the  great  divisions  of  the  procession,  the  pro- 
gramme requires  that  the  magnates  should  walk 
first,”  though  there  is  a procession  by  divisions  ac- 
cording to  rank ; let  it  be  that  gaps  in  the  ascending 
series  are  never  to  be  filled,  to  human  knowledge,  as 


*So,  traces  of  tlie  fancy  of  spontaneous  generation,  are  in  Virgil,  Lu- 
cretius and  Aristotle,  and  Sir  James  Stephen  tells  us  that  a Japanese 
theologian  maintained  it  in  dispute  with  Francis  Xavier,  as  an  article 
of  faith. 


12 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


Darwin  confesses  the  chasm  between  man  and  ape 
cannot  now  be,  by  any  species  extant  or  extinct, — 
there  being  sometimes  no  succession  or  no  advance,  — 
species  disappearing,  degeneracies  occurring  both  in 
single  characteristics  and  in  classes,  decay  making 
way  for  growth,  the  chain  lengthening  and  growing 
finer,  but  dropping  certain  links ; and  you  have 
just  such  a forward  movement  from  the  Paleozoic 
ages,  with  occasional  breaks  and  degradations,  as 
forms  a fitting  analogue  — whether  meant  so  or  not 

— to  the  actual  progress  of  mankind.  It  must  be 
so  till  the  succession  in  nature  is  filled  up  smoothly 
to  our  knowledge,  without  gap  or  jar,  — a solid  con- 
tinuity, something  more  than  that  ” higher  and  imma- 
terial connection  in  the  Divine  plan”  which  our  great 
Harvard  naturalist  rests  upon ; or  else  until  the  suc- 
cession itself  is  disproved,  as  it  now  never  can  be. 
It  is  against  well-settled  analogy,  if  man  is  a period, 
a full  stop  every  way  in  what  the  Creator  has  been 
telling,  if  the  doctrine  of  ascending  order  in  creation 
is  true  in  a proper  sense,  and  that  of  Natural  Pro- 
gress in  history,  so  correlated,  is  false.  There  is 
perceived  capacity  of  indefinite  increase  in  physical 
life-power  along  the  lower  line,  removing  life,  it  is 
thought,  from  the  same  category  with  material  force, 

— why  not  such  increase  in  higher  powers  ? Even 
Natural  Selection,  so  far  as  it  goes,  not  always,  con- 
fessedly, securing  "the  survival  of  the  fittest”  in 
lower  realms,  and  leaving  room  for  a higher  design 
and  energy  behind  itself,  furnishes  an  analogue  for 
rational  selection  in  human,  especially  in  Clmistian 
history.  It  is  a bundle  of  facts  and  instincts.  Spen- 


AND  THE  CimiSTIAN  LAW, 


13 


cer’s  phrase,  just  quoted,  strips  it  of  the  color  of 
intelligence  which  the  term  "selection”  implies, 
leaving  it  in  a low,  phenomenal  sense  the  analogue  I 
have  indicated  to  that  which  is  higher.  And  in 
respect  to  this.  Bishop  Butler’s  familiar  statement  ^ 
of  the  natural  ascendency  of  reason  and  virtue  in  the 
world  under  the  government  of  God,  anticipated  long 
ago  what  I am  now  saying.  Moreover,  the  persist- 
ence and  correlation  of  forces,  shorn  of  the  unproven 
fancy  of  the  identity  of  all  forces,  — mechani- 
cal, chemical,  vital,  muscular,  physical,  — finds  a 
counterpart  in  the  grand  and  imperishable  character- 
istics of  the  moral  energies  that  create  the  march  and 
waymarks  of  human  society  in  all  ages,  but  pre-emi- 
nently since  Christ. 

ni.  We  are  now  to  determine  and  limit  the  word 
" Law,”  in  the  phrases  " Natural  Law  ” and  " Christian 
Law,”  and  herein  we  shall  chiefly  find  the  basis  of 
adjustment  between  the  two.  Certain  other  great 
confusions  of  thought  meet  us  here  at  the  threshold. 
The  Doctrine  of  Progress, — taking  for  a moment  the 
larger  and  looser  term  than  even  Law, — may  mean 
(1)  a prevailing  or  constant  course  of  fact;  or  (2) 
it  may  mean  the  method,  modus  ojperandi^ — not  the 
ruling  facts,  but  the  rule  of  the  facts, — the  rationale, 

^“It  may  require  to  be  more  particularly  considered,  that  power  in 
a society  by  being  under  the  direction  of  virtue,  naturally  increases, 
and  has  a necessary  tendency  to  prevail  over  opposite  power,  not  under 
the  direction  of  it ; in  like  manner  as  power,  by  being  under  the  direc- 
tion of  reason,  increases,  and  has  a tendency  to  prevail  over  brute 
force.”  [But.  Anal.  Parti..,  Chap.  III.,  V.  — p.  95  seq.  Compl.  Works, 
Carter’s  Ed.  1812.] 


14 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


or  principle  of  order,  according  to  which  they  occur ; 
or  (3)  it  may  mean  the  force  that  produces  them, 
the  power  that  makes  them  facts. ^ The  Doctrine  as 
a whole,  be  it  Natural  or  Christian,  means  and  affirms 
all  three.  In  proving  it,  all  three  must  be  proven. 
And  the  word  "Law”  is  used  in  these  days  for  all 
three.  And  either  term  also.  Doctrine  or  Law,  for 
either  of  the  three.  Fact,  rule  or  method,  and  force, 
are  every  hour  mistaken  for  each  other  by  men  who 
ought  to  think  more  accurately. 

When  we  say  that  it  is  the  law  of  a certain  thing 
to  show  certain  phenomena,  we  are  thinking  only  of 
constant  or  prevailing  facts.  When  we  speak  of  the 
law  of  the  thing  operating  to  such  results  or  phe- 
nomena, we  mean  far  more  than  the  facts,  the  force 
in  the  thing  that  makes  the  facts  apparent.  But 
when  we  affirm  that  the  law  is  that  these  phenomena 
shall  occur,  or  the  force  act,  thus  or  so,  our  language 
points  to  something  different  from  both,  a method, 
rationale  or  principle  of  order.  ^ 

A few  illustrations  will  set  this  distinction  in  clear 


* The  word  “rule’*  is  sometimes  used,  aside  from  its  proper  sense, 
for  prevailing  fact,  as  opposed  to  exception.  The  analysis  above  differs 
from  that  of  the  Duke  of  Argyle  (“Reign  of  Law,”  pp.  64,  65,  Fifth 
Lond.  Ed.),  but  a little  examination  will  show  that  his  second,  third 
and  fourth  “secondary  senses”  can  be  reduced  to  one,  and  coincide 
with  (3)  above,  and  that  the  first  in  both  analyses  coincide ; while  his  fifth 
sense,  “ abstract  conceptions  of  the  mind,  deduced  from  the  phenomena 
as  axioms  of  thought  necessary  to  our  understanding  of  them,” — or, 
“an  order  of  thought,” — is  at  bottom  the  same  with  (2)  here  given. 
I should  not  answer,  however,  “ the  three  great  questions  which  Sci- 
ence asks  of  Nature, — the  What,  the  How,  and  the  Why,” — as  he 
does.  How?  is  a question  of  method,  not  of  cause.  Why?  is  the 
question  of  producing  force.  The  question  of  i>urpose  or  intention  is, 
Wherefore? 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


15 


light.  The  word  ” gravitation,”  properly  describes 
constant  terrestrial  facts;  viz.,  that  bodies  of  matter 
disengaged  in  position  move  from  rest  towards  the 
earth’s  centre.  To  name  attraction,  is  to  name  a 
force  to  which  every  such  fact  is  ascribed.  To  say 
that  bodies  have  such  a tendency,  is  to  say  that  such 
a force  permanently  resides  in  them.  A molecule  or 
an  atom  gives  you  the  same  distinction  between  fact 
and  force  as  any  body  of  matter.  But  a statement 
of  the  manner,  proportion,  or  intensity,  in  certain  cir- 
cumstances with  which  this  force  acts, — involving 
relations  of  space,,  time,  quantity  of  matter,  and 
velocity, — is  a rule,  rationale,  or  principle  of  order. 
For  example,  that  attraction  acts  in  direct  proportion 
to  the  quantity  of  matter  and  in  inverse  proportion  to 
the  square  of  the  distance.  A rule  is  behind  the  facts, 
and  a force,  like  attraction,  is  behind  the  rule  or  rules. 
A sentence  from  Newton*  will  show  how  he  recog- 
nized this  distinction.  " Gravity  must  be  caused 
by  an  agent  acting  constantly  according  to  certain 
laws.^^ 

Apply  the  doctrine  of  gravitation  to  the  universe-, 
or  to  a molecule,  and  you  carry  the  same  distinction 
of  fact,  rule,  and  force.  Again,  the  simplest  form 
of  motion  implies  an  impulse  imparted,  a method  of 
proceeding:  viz.,  in  the  same  direction  with  the 
impulse,  and  then  the  fact  of  change  of  position  in 
space. 

Molecular  attraction,  motion,  force,  must  needs 
have  methods  or  rules,  as  well  as  effects,  else  nofore- 


* Third  letter  to  Bentley. 


16 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


seen  constancy  in  the  effects,  and  no  calculable  action 
possible  in  respect  to  molecule,  matter,  or  body. 
Also,  if  heat  is  a mode  of  motion,  then  behind  the 
phenomena  is  the  same  force,  and  the  laws  of  motion 
as  well.  We  are  taught  in  mechanics  that  the  result 
of  compound  or  coefficient  forces  has  also  its  rational 
rules.  We  are  never  to  confound  these  three  with 
each  other.  Take  an  elliptical  orbit  in  the  starry 
heavens  as  a constant  fact,  and  Astronomy  will  tell 
not  only  of  the  component  forces,  centripetal  and 
centrifugal,  but  of  the. laws  of  sidereal  motion,  that 
is,  the  rules  of  these  forces.  If  inertia  is  due  to  the 
equilibrium  of  forces,  any  explanation  that  comes 
between  the  fact  and  the  forces, — the  How  that  can 
be  rationally  placed  between  the  What  and  the  Why, 
— is  a law.  When  a new  set  of  facts,  like  those  of 
electricity,  gives  us  a new  force,  the  understanding 
of  the  laws  of  its  action  is  of  more  moment  to  the 
philosopher  and  to  the  practical  man  alike,  than  all 
the  facts,  even  if  they  could  know  them  all.  In 
Chemistry,  the  strong,  mutual  affinity  of  certain  sub- 
stances, the  atomic  proportions  in  which  they  combine, 
and  the  compounds  they  consequently  form,  are  re- 
spectively force,  law,  and  fact.  ” Life  adds  a new 
and  higher  force  to  Chemistry,”  says  Dr.  Stirling, 
and  at  once  come  in  vital  laws,  and  vital  facts  result- 
ing. If,  as  Comte  imagined,  we  could  reduce  all 
sorts  of  phenomena,  — or  facts  apparent,  — to  the 
pngle  law  of  atomic  action,  we  should  have  behind 
both  phenomena  and  law,  atomic  force.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  a law,  however,  in  the  sense  of  fact,  rule 
or  force,  that  it  should  be  measurable  by  mathe- 


AND  THE  CIIRISTIAN  LAW. 


17 


matics,*  or  capable  of  expression  in  the  formula)  of 
any  branch  of  that  science.  Even  in  Chemistry, 
these  formulse  sometimes  fail ; the  higher  analyses 
foil  or  elude  them.|  And  the  intellectual  and  moral 
energies  in  human  history,  or  psychical  powers  in 
action,  must  of  necessity  always  evade  expression. 
In  the  proper  sense  of  law,  they  are  immeasurable 
by  such  formulae. 

Neither  the  word  ''  law,”  however,  nor  the  word 
" rule,”  is  used  here  in  its  proper  or  primary  sense. 
Both  are  moral  in  their  origin,  not  physical.  They 
are  used  in  physics,  necessarily,  in  a transferred  and 
improper  sense.  Let  me  put  together  here  three 
definitions  of  three  eminent  men.  " Law,  in  its  most 
general  and  comprehensive  sense,”  says  Blackstone, 
" signifies  a rule  of  action,  prescribed  by  some  supe- 
rior, and  which  the  inferior  is  bound  to  obey.” 

” Law,”  says  Dr.  N.  W.  Taylor,  ” difiers  widely 
from  wholesome  counsel  or  good  advice  ; and  one  of 
its  essential  characteristics  is,  that  it  is  a rule  of 
action,  determining  what  ought  to  be  done.  With- 
out this  conception  of  a rule  of  action,  that  of  law 
cannot  be  formed.”  ''  In  its  primary  signification,” 
says  the  Duke  of  Argyle,  a ' law  ’ is  the  authorita- 
tive expression  of  human  Will  enforced  by  Power.” 

* See  Pres.  F.  P.  parnard’s  Address  to  the  Amer.  Assoc.  Adv.  Sci- 
ence, 1869  (Proceedings,  pp.  93-101),  where  the  alleged  interchangea- 
bility of  thought-power  and  physical  force  is  admirably  refuted.  For 
convenience  and  brevity,  I use  the  word  “ force’*  throughout  this  lec- 
ture for  power  in  action. 

t When  the  attempt  is  made  to  put  a complex  reaction  into  numer- 
ical symbols,  the  equations  are  apt  to  express  either  more  than  we 
know  or  less.”  [Qual.  Chem.  Anal,  by  Pres.  Eliot  and  Prof.  Storer, 
Int.  p.  10.] 


2 


18 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


These  definitions  contemplate  both  the  sources  and 
the  subjects  of  Law ; their  common  elements  are  an 
intelligent  mandate  requiring  compliance,  and  intelli- 
gently received ; an  expression  of  mind,  addressed 
to  mind,  to  be  understood,^  considered,  and  decided 
upon.  Action  corresponding  thereto,  forms  no  part 
of  the  original  and  true  idea  of  law ; the  requirement 
and  the  authority  with  which  it  is  required  are  all^ 
force  compelling  action  is  expressly  excluded.  But 
in  physics,  on  the  contrary,  action,  under  pressure  of 
force,  is  in  the  very  idea  of  law,  and  the  original  moral 
or  governmental  meaning,  is  altogether  excluded. 
The  sense  is  entirely  changed  and  new.  The  two 
uses  of  the  word  have  really  nothing  in  common,  or 
if  anything,  only  an  implication  that  there  lies  behind 
each  some  source,  whether  it  be  of  action  or  of  a rule 
of  action. 

Contrast,  now,  with  these  well-settled  definitions, 
that  of  Herbert  Spencer.  Law  is  ” uniformity  of 
relations  among  phenomena”!  Now,  phenomena 
are  mere  facts,  not  rules ; and  uniformity  is  a mere 
fact,  not  a rule.  Spencer  attempts  here  to  confine 
law  to  the  one  meaning  of  constant  facts.  The  uni- 
formity, however,  may  be  accidental,  so  far  as  reason 
can  see,"'  if  that  is  all ; and  it  is  all.  But  only 
uniformity  of  relations  between  fact  and  force,  through 

* When  Blackstone  says  that  the  “ most  general  and  comprehensive 

sense  ” is  “ applied  indiscriminately  to  all  kinds  of  actions  animate,  or 
inanimate^  rational  or  irrational^* **  he  does  not  show  discrimination  as 
on  other  points,  or  perhaps  shows  that  his  age  had  not  learned  some 
very  simple  and  clear  distinctions.  Can  a “rule  be  prescribed  for  an 
inanimate,  irrational  object,  as  for  a rational,  animate  one?  Is  the 
former,  in  any  proper,  intelligible  sense,  hound  to  obey  ? 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


19 


soni3  intelligible  principle  of  order,  i.  e.,  only 
rational  relations,  can  make  more  than  accident,  or 
give  uniformity  the  meaning  of  law  at  all.  We  can 
know  fact  indeed,  phenomenal  or  not,  respecting  a 
thine  or  class  of  things  without  discovering  the 
rationale,  method,  or  principle  of  order  through  which 
it  becomes  fact ; but  we  cannot  escape  thinking  an 
adequate  force  exists.  A single  physical  fact  demands 
force  to  account  for  it,  though  such  a fact,  sporadic, 
would  not  suggest  a method,  or  principle  of  necessity, 
i.  c.,  a law  in  the  sense  nearest  to  its  primitive  mean- 
ing. For  it  involves  no  established  rule,  as  its  fre- 
quent recurrence  w^ould.  Invariably  recurring  fact, 
however,  is  not  indispensable  to  the  suggestion  of 
such  a rule ; prevailing  or  general  fact  is  sufficient. 
So  fact  goes  before  law  and  force  in  thought ; but 
force,  before  law  and  fact  in  things.  Force  can- 
not belong  to  phenomena,  or  to  relations  of  pheno- 
mena; to  events,  or  to  the  method  of  events;  but 
only  to  existence.  Fact,  is  matter  of  observa- 
tion. Law,  is  matter  of  judgment.  Force,  is.matter 
of  intuition.  We  state  the  first  in  a definition,  the 
second  in  a formula,  the  third  in  a description.  We 
reach  the  intuition  ever  and  only,  in  the  experience 
of  adequate  force,  ^.  e.,  cause  properly  so  called,  force 
producing  facts ; but  the  notion  of  power  involved 
in  it  once  reached,  has  validity  to  the  mind  inde- 
pendently of  facts  or  laws.  Constant  facts  imply 
constant  forces  and  constant  methods,  else  they  are 
constant  accidents,  which  is  a contradiction  in  terms 
and  in  thought.  Change  of  fact  follows  change  of 
force,  and,  if  permanent,  under  some  principle  or 


20 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


rule.  Abolish  forces,  and  facts  and  methods  or 
rules  are  abolished  at  the  same  stroke. 

Now,  of  these  three  terms,  thus  distinguished  and 
illustrated,  the  two  extremes,  fact  and  force,  are  sel- 
dom directly  compounded,  but  the  middle  term, 
which  comes  nearest  to  the  true  meaning  of  law,  is 
incessantly  compounded,  in  speech  and  thought,  with 
the  other  two.  The  universal  or  even  general  fact 
concerning  a thing  or  class  of  things,  is  called  its  law, 
and  so  is  the  force  that  causes  it ; or,  what  is  the 
same  thing,  its  law,  rule,  method  is  said  to  cause  it. 
And  thus,  through  the  departure  from  the  meaning 
of  the  middle  term,  the  other  two,  so  utterly  distinct, 
are  blended,  or  the  word  " law”  is  used  to  cover  all 
three. 

IV.  In  recognizing,  then,  a Natural  Law  of  Pro- 
gress, I recognize  that  the  Doctrine  of  Natural 
Progress  includes  more  than  is  properly  called.  Law, 
viz.  : (l)a  body  of  facts  ; (2) rules,  methods,  princi- 
ples ; and  (3) a force,  or  power  in  action;  and  that 
these  are  confused  in  what  is  called  Natural  Law. 
It  is  needful  to  establish  each  distinctively. 

(1.)  Of  the  facts.  I may  decline  to  enumerate  these, 
as  is  often  attempted,  since  justly  to  represent  them 
would  require  a library  of  statements.  Nor  is  it 
necessary  even  to  exemplify  largely ; the  facts  are 
patent ; they  are  ever  on  the  tongue  of  the  nineteenth 
century. 

The  accumulations  of  all  secular  science  '^according 
to  the  law  of  compound  interest,”  as  Sir  William 
Thompson  said  the  other  day  from  the  chair  of  the 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  iLAW. 


21 


British  Association,  the  decline  of  a vice  like  intem- 
perance in  such  bodies  as  the  English  House  of 
Commons  and  the  Congress  of  the  United  States, 
according  to  the  testimony  of  the  Right  Hon.  John 
Bright  and  the  Hon.  Henry  Wilson,  are  instances  of 
improvement.  The  low  social  conditions  of  former 
days,  pictured  by  Mr.  Hallam  in  the  ninth  chapter 
of  his  ” Middle  Ages  ” and  by  Lord  Macaulay  in  the 
third  chapter  of  his  ” History  of  England,”  contrasting 
as  they  do,  with  those  of  our  own  day, — and,  indeed, 
the  mere  fact  that  such  books  as  our  histories  of  civ- 
ilization and  philosophies  of  history  are  possible,  are 
illustrations  on  a still  broader  scale  of  the  grand 
progress  of  mankind.  The  arts  of  modern  life,  their 
perfection  and  their  multiplication,  will  occur  to 
every  one  as  other  examples ; notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  some  of  them  are  evidences  of  temporary, 
partial,  or  local  decline.  In  the  more  advanced 
nations  they  lap  over  here  and  there  upon  uncivi- 
lized countries,  and  show,  in  this,  a native  and 
divinely  appointed  tendency.  That  the  material  good 
which  society  achieves  and  the  rights  once  granted 
only  to  individuals  or  classes,  extend  to  the  people  at 
large  ere  long ; that  exchanges  grow  easier  and  wider, 
and  franchises  more  common;  that  inequalities  of 
privilege,  facility,  and  achievement  become  less  each 
century ; that  the  under  side  of  society  steadily  though 
slowly  rises ; that  in  property,  liberty,  and  social 
privilege  the  equalization  among  men,  is  ever  going 
on, — these  things  are  evidence  in  favor  of  the 
beautiful  belief,  that  — 

“Ever  through  the  ages  one  unceasing  purpose  runs, 

And  the  thoughts  of  men  are  induced  by  the  process  of  the  suns.” 


22  THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 

" Lost  arts  ” do  not  disprove  it ; they  were  less 
for  the  general  welfare  than  modern  ones,  as  well  as 
less  intellectual.  And  in  most  respects  we  have  found 
better  ones  than  we  have  lost.  Were  it  clear  that 
the  Hanging  Gardens  of  Babylon  implied  a force  and 
skill  beyond  those  required  by  either  of  our  Pacific 
railroads,  the  public  utility,  besides  the  genius 
involved  in  the  modern  work,  would  place  it  im- 
measurably in  advance  of  the  ancient.  The  labor 
engineered  in  building  the  Pyramids  sinks  beside  that 
of  the  great  enterprises  of  our  day.*  And  when  a 
recent  art  like  that  of  making  glass,  turns  up,  to  our 
surprise,  at  Pompeii,  it  simply  shows  that  the  ancients 
were  even  with  us  in  one  thing,  but  not  on  the  whole 
or  in  most.  When  a writer  of  our  own  day  like 
Fronde, f declares  that  "the  level  of  comfort  in  the 
families  of  the  laboring  millions,  has  in  this  country 
been  rather  declining  than  rising.  The  important 
results  have  been  so  far,  rather  political  and  social  ” ; 
he  writes  truly  of  his  own  country,  but  not  of  ours  ; 
he  admits  political  and  social  progress,  and  he  dis- 
closes the  fact,  that  lower  progress  in  a people  often 
waits  long  upon  that  which  is  higher.  Often,  on 
the  other  hand,  lower  improvement  libo?'ates  powers 
that  arrest  decay,  and  removes  conditions  that  pre- 
vent the  higher  improvement.  A single  convenience 
created  or  universally  distributed,  comes  in  this  way 
to  have  immeasurably  more  meaning  than  it  has  in 
itself. 

2.  Of  the  methods,  rules,  rationale,  or  law  of  the 

* See  Stephenson. 

t Short  Studies,  2d  series,  pp.  245-279,  “ On  Progress.** 


AND  THE  CimiSTIAN  LAW. 


23 


fiicts.  We  ivaiit  besides  these  facts,  some  principle 
or  principles  of  order  according  to  which  they  occur. 
Oar  knowledge  of  them  must  always  be  fragmentary  ; 
and  we  seek,  in  addition,  some  ground  of  conviction 
that  they  belong  to  an  established  plan,  some  secu- 
rity for  them  in  some  order  of  thought  and  life  with 
which  they  tally.  Of  course  they  prove,  in  them- 
selves the  natural  possibility  of  progress  ; for  noth- 
ing occurs  which  is  not  possible ; — and  so  prove  it, 
that  historic  examples  of  decline,  and  ever  so  many 
of  them,  can  never  disprove  it.  They  show  a real 
capacity  in  man,  against  which  the  worst  that  can  be 
said  is,  that  it  is  a capacity  at  times  interfered  with. 
Nothing  but  universal  degeneracy  in  all  things  could 
show  the  opposite.  That  the  balance  may  not, 
however,  yet  turn  against  man  fatally  and  forever, 
depends  not  on  facts,  but  on  laws  and  powers.  Her- 
bert Spencer  comes  forward  with  a law,  derived 
from  Von  Baer,*  which,  it  is  claimed,  will  explain 
and  assure  Progress,  as  well  as  what  is  called 
Development.  It  is  the  law  of  evolution,  or  the 
constant,  universal  transformation  of  the  simple 
into  the  complex,  the  homogeneous  into  the  hetero- 
geneous. Is  this,  if  it  be  true,  a rationale  or  rule  at 
all?  does  it  rise  above  the  realm  of  fact?  Plainly, 
not.  The  question  of  its  truth  is  a question  of  fact. 
And  it  is  not  entirely  unquestionable  even  as  fact. 
Mr.  Spencer  himself  shows  that  Science  proceeds  both 
ways,  sometimes  moving  from  the  complex  to  the 
simple,  f Henri  Taine,  the  art  critic  of  the  school 

* After  Wolff  and  Harvey.  [See  Spencer’s  Eecent  Discussions,  p. 
134.] 

t Rec.  Disc.  pp.  181,  182. 


24 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


to  which  Darwin,  Huxley,  Buckle,  Draper,  Bain, 
Lewis,  Mauclsley,  and  Spencer  belong,  says  that 
the  art  of  the  Greeks  perfected  itself  in  its  simpli- 
city, and  that  we  of  to-day  must  find  our  models 
there,  because  "the  simplicity  of  their  culture 
kept  them  within  a circle  beyond  which  the  com- 
plexity of  our  culture  has  impelled  us.’-*  And  Max 
Muller  shows  that  from  the  simple  to  the  complex  in 
religion  is  just  the  process  of  corruption.!  I have 
already  pointed  out  how  Spencer  confounds  evolution 
as  fact,  with  improvement,  which  is  quite  a distinct 
thing. 

We  ask,  then,  for  the  reason  or  rule  of  evolution, 
since  it  is  not  itself  either.  If  it  contains  none  it  is 
no  rationale  or  Law  of  Progress.  How,  then,  does 
Progress  come?  Thus,  answers  Mr.  Spencer, — 
" Every  active  force  produces  more  than  one  change ; 
every  cause  produces  more  than  one  effect.^’  He 
calls  this  the  law  of  differentiation ; the  law  of  the 
law  of  evolution,  confounding,  however,  law  and 
force  (or  cause)  together,  for  beliind  law  in  the 
proper  sense  here  the  next  thing  of  course,  is  cause. 
" I will  tell  you  the  cause he  says,  " of  the  evolu- 
tion of  the  complex  from  the  simple,  the  more  perfect 
from  the  less  perfect ; it  is  that  the  cause  (whatever 
it  be)  produces  a number  of  effects.”  There  are  two 
senses  here,  perhaps,  of  the  word  " cause,”  but  is  all 
this,  either  cause,  or  law-j  or  merely  another  constant 
fact;  a phenomena  of  cause,  or  force  in  action? 

* Taine,  Art  in  Greece,  Amer.  Ed.  p.  40.  Fronde  maintains  that 
English  life  was  simpler  of  yore,  and  therefore  now  degenerate. — Short 
Studies. 

t Science  of  Language,  2d  Series,  pp.  442,  443. 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


25 


Plainly,  nothing  more.  According  to  Mr.  Spencer, 
and  all  his  school,  moreover,  we  know  nothing  but 
phenomena  or  facts  apparent.  If  he  is  telling  us 
anything  he  knows,  then,  he  is  describing  a mere  phe- 
nomenon ! But  why,  again,  is  the  number  of  effects 
differentiated  ? They  are  not  in  themselves  different 
because  plural.  There  might  be  more  than  otie 
from  one  cause,  yet  all  of  the  same  kind.  And 
why  does  this  differentiation,  which  is  not  itself 
improvement,  result  in  improvement?  Among  the 
multiplex  changes  produced,  if  differentiated  in  some 
way  for  which  we  have  yet  no  rule  or  reason,  may  be 
inferior  ones  as  well  as  superior,  the  worst  as  well  as 
the  best,  and  these  may  be  perpetuated  as  well  as 
the  others.  They  may  be  the  strongest.  So  it  often 
happens ; the  poorest  of  seeds  are  quickened  as 
well  as  the  finest,  and 

“ The  evil  that  men  do,  lives  after  them, 

The  good  is  oft  interred  with  their  bones.” 

In  consequence  of  this  logical  gap  in  his  hypothe- 
sis of  evolution,  Mr.  Spencer  feels  the  need  of  sup- 
plementing it  with  that  of  Natural  Selection ; but 
when  he  changes  the  name  of  this  to  ” Survival  of 
the  Fittest,” — to  exclude  all  color  of  intelligence, 
and  reduce  it  to  mere  blind  fact,  without  a rational 
element, — he  does  not  rid  it  of  the  patent  confes- 
sion that  the  causes  at  work  in  history,  both  ” natu- 
ral ” and  human,  produce  the  unfittest  as  well  as  the 
fittest.  We  ask  again,  how  is  it  that  among  human 
products  the  fittest  are  selected  to  survive?  He 
has  no  answer,  though  Bishop  Butler  had  one 


26 


THE  NJ^TURAL  LA  W OF  PROGRESS 


long  ago.  He  knows  no  reason  of  things,  no  ra- 
tional method  even,  nothing  but  phenomena  and 
phenomenal  method.  In  later  publications,*  he 
confesses  the  insufficiency  of  mere  differentiation, 
and  adds, — as  a new  law  of  the  law, — ” the 
evolution  of  the  definite  from  the  indefinite,”  a 
very  indefinite  evolution ! which  is,  at  best,  only 
specific  differentiation,  and  which  yields  no  solution 
whatever,  but  only  complicates  the  question,  adding 
to  the  mesh  of  elements,  and  giving  us  more  to  solve 
after  a method  that  solves  nothing.  We  still  ask, 
Why  is  the  movement  of  man  in  history,  as  asserted, 
from  the  indefinite  to  the  definite  ? — the  former  being 
the  imperfect,  or  an  element  of  it,  the  latter  of  the 
perfect.  Why  does  man  proceed  in  that  direc- 
tion? Our  philosopher  has  no  answer.  ,So  much 
for  what  is  plainly  no  law,  in  a correct  sense  or 
an  incorrect.  What  is  the  law  ? I can  best  answer 
after  showing  what  is  the  force.  For  method  and 
rationale  are  always  the  method  and  rationale  of 
force. 

3.  Of  the  cause  of  Progress,  or  the  force  in 
action.  If  this  famous  doctrine,  — which  is  the  chief 
support  of  current  error,  and  gives  us  a Naturalistic 
instead  of  a Natural  Law  or  a Christian  one,  — dis- 
closes the  true  cause,  or  any  cause  at  all,  it  is  to  be 
found  in  what  is  already  before  us.  Evolution  or 
differentiation,  or  some  supplement  to  these  must 
contain  it.  But  the  whole  idea  of  development, 
whatever  its  metaphysical  supports,  even  as  worked 


Appleton’s  last  editions. 


AND  rilE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


27 


out  in  respect  to  the  origination  of  species,  is  obvi- 
ously, at  the  utmost,  only  an  idea  of  method,  leaving 
the  question  — the  method  of  what?  unanswered. 
This  is  why  there  is  cogency  in  the  criticism  of  Mar- 
tineau,  Mivart,  and  the  Christian  respondents  in  for- 
eign and  American  reviews,  that  the  theory  rationally 
requires,  and  cannot  exclude  the  agency  of  God.  As 
Dr.  Stirling  says  of  the  vitality  of  protoplasm, 
explain  it  as  we  may,  we  shall  never  explain  it  by 
molecules.”  So  I affirm  of  Progress;  explain  it  as 
we  may,  we  shall  never  explain  it  by  evolution.  For 
that  cannot  possibly  be  an  explanation  which  yields 
no  first  origin  or  cause  for  what  it  assumes  to  explain. 
Mr.  Spencer  calls  evolution  ” an  empirical  generaliza- 
tion,” and  difierentiation.  a "rational”  one,  — both 
being  evidently  mere  phenomenal  methods  and  one 
as  empirical,  or  as  truly  known  only  as  phenomenon, 
as  the  other,  — just  as  if  one  generalization  produced 
another,  and  that  which  has  been  generalized  also. 
It  is  much  as  if  we  should  ask  for  the  forces  that 
produce  a very  peculiar  man’s  character,  and  should 
be  told,  "it.  is  the  general  man  in  him”;  or,  as  if 
one  should  ask  for  the  cause  of  such  institutions  as 
Harvard  College  "empirically  generalized,”  and  be 
told  " it  is  the  American  college  rationally  general- 
ized ! ” Even  suppose  evolution  to  be  the  method 
by  which  the  complex,  the  definite,  and  the  fittest 
appear  in  the  history  of  God’s  world,  in  every  depart- 
ment, and  survive^  it  is  manifestly  no  adequate  force, 
or  cause,  i.  e.,  power  in  action.  It  yields  simply  a 
supposition  how  some  unnamed  power  in  action 
works  wdien  it  does  work.  We  have  got  no  true 


28 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


laws  from  the  pretentious  and  empty  generalizations 
of  Spencer,  — so  readily  does  this  noted  scheme 
crumble  at  the  touch  of  analysis,  — we  shall  get  no 
cause  from  confounding  supposed  laws  with  force,  as 
if  they  were  themselves  dynamic  and  adequate.  We 
must  look  elsewhere  to  understand  Human  Progress 
at  all. 

V.  And  now,  using  the  term  Law  ” in  the  more 
exact  sense  which  has  been  extricated  from  the  pre- 
vailing confusion  of  speech  and  thought,  and  treating 
together  on  the  positive  side  what  cannot  well  be 
kept  entirely  separate,  I deem  it  idle  to  look  any- 
where but  to  the  well-established  laws  of  human 
nature  for  any  Law  of  Progress.  These  are  its  natu- 
ral laws.  The  producing  force  may  be  one,  certainly 
is  one ; but  there  is  no  one  Law,  there  must  be 
many.  No  fact  that  can  be  cited  is  to  be  referred  to 
one  alone.  Many  blend  in  every  form  and  phase  of 
human  advancement;  no  one  can  tell  how  many. 
There  are  no  laws  of  human  nature  but  may  be 
employed  in  it,  — each  in  improvement  of  each  kind, 
— those  of  the  body  in  that  which  is  physical,  those 
of  the  intellect  in  that  which  is  intellectual,  the  social 
laws  in  that  which  is  social,  the  moral  and  spiritual 
laws  in  that  which  is  moral  and  spiritual.  The 
Divine  mechanism  of  the  soul  is  sufficient  — under 
guidance — for  all  the  secular  improvements  we  see, 
and  possesses  powers,  even  in  the  savage  state,  as 
Mr.  Wallace  has  shown, which  are  unnecessary  and 


* Contra  Darwin. 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


29 


less  there,  and  predict  a better  state.  Even  in 
barbarism,  man  is  capable  of  aversion  to  it.f  Nor 
could  any  kind  of  improvement  possibly  take  place 
without  these  natural  laws  of  mind.  The  rationale  or 
method  of  each  is  peculiar  to  each.  Their  name  is 
legion.  Progress  itself  is  not  one,  but  many.  Man’s 
wants,  notions,  motives,  intelligent  choices,  have  a part 
in  every  species  of  it,  at  every  step  ; even  imagination 
and  association  have  their  place  and  play  their  part, 
but  much  more  the  natural  faculty  of  belief ; and  it 
is  idle  to  attempt  to  set  them  aside  and  put  instead 
an  abstract  and  high-sounding  generalization  about 
the  way  in  which  force  acts  as  force.  We  can  gen- 
eralize a little.  Progress,  in  the  main,  can  be  referred 
to  human  knowing,  human  feeling,  and  human  doing. 
It  is  a law  of  knowing,  that  one  discovery  opens  the 
path  for  another ; the  discoverer  is  brought  into  a 
position  to  make  another,  and  has  individual  methods 
for  each  of  his  faculties  — among  which  those  of 
logic  are  most  important  — by  which  proceeding  he 
legitimately  and  naturally  makes  further  discovery, 
or  others  following  him  make  it.  This  is  the  way  in 
which  Sir  William  Thompson’s  affirmation  respecting 
the  accumulations  of  science  is  true.  It  is  a law 
again  of  feeling  that  it  produces  feeling ; every  type 
of  sensibility  humane,  aBsthetic,  ethical,  builds  devel- 
opment upon  development,  expression  upon  expres- 
sion, throb  upon  throb,  impulse  upon  impulse.  It  is 
a law  of  doing,  also,  that  what  is  once  done  can  be 
easier  and  better  done  and  something  besides,  never 
done  before ; facility  thus  is  acquired  for  completer  as 

t Pere  Mailla  in  Englander”  for  Jan.,  p.  73. 


30 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


well  as  more  finished  action.  Such  laws  of  discovery, 
sensibility,  habit,  are  simply  modes  of  the  working 
of  powers,  belonging  to  something  ; and  force,  cause, 
is  always  power.  Facts  are  never  governed  by  mere 
laws,  as  the  Naturalistic  school  teach  people  to  say, — 
they  are  governed  by  powers  alone.  Laws  are  sim- 
ply stated  methods,  in  which  powers  act  and  govern. 
As  the  laws  of  language  and  the  laws  of  science  alike 
are  only  the  laws  of  mind,  so  of  Progress.  It  is 
natural  to  spirit,  it  is  the  original  gift  of  God,  to 
seek  improvement. 

“ This  sacred  hunger  marks  th’  immortal  mind.” 

God  seeks  it  also,  but  not  His  own,  which  is 
impossible. 

We  find  the  cause  of  all  Progress,  then,  in  mind 
alone,  as  we  find  its  laws  in  the  laws  of  mind  alone. 
So  far  as  we  know.  Progress  is  natural  to  nothing 
beside.  Mr.  Spencer’s  whole  philosophy  is  an  ambi- 
tious and  stupendous  attempt  to  explain  the  universe 
without  aught  but  the  forces  of  matter,  without  re- 
course to  mind  or  God.  Spirit,  which  we  all  know  best, 
is  to  him,  indeed,  unknowable.  It  is  by  the  law  of 
parsimony  that  the  architectonic  principle  of  Progress 
must  needs  be  thought  as  one,  while  the  laws  of  it 
must  be  thought  as  many.  Therefore,  there  may  be 
Progress  in  one  de])artment  and  none  in  another,  as 
we  see  there  is.  Spirit  embraces  free  choice,  which 
may,  in  fact,  reverse  Progress  at  times,  as  we  see  it 
does.  If  difierentiation  in  the  abstract  were  the 
cause,  or  an  adequate  force,  it  would  give  us  invariable 
results  which  we  nowhere  have.  If  matter  were  the 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


31 


cause,  if  all  improvements  were  traceable  to  a physi- 
cal basis,”  then  it  would  follow  that  it  did  not  rccpiire 
mjnd  to  originate  what,  when  originated,  it  requires 
mind  to  comprehend;  which  is  to  do  much  less.  It 
took  more  than  the  simia  in  Darwin  to  think  out 
" The  Origin  of  Species.”  It  required  the  simia 
plus  Darwin;  and  you  must  add  Huxley  to  proto- 
plasm, to  get  protoplasm  even  conceived  of ; while 
it  must  have  taken  infinitely  more  mind  still,  to  pro- 
duce Huxley  and  Darwin,  and  Adam,  out  of  noth- 
ing, or  out  of  anything.  Such  and  such  differentia- 
tions arose  somehow  (this  is  the  unsolved  problem 
of  the  solution) , in  the  nebulous  primeval  matter, — 
so  say  these  philosophers,^ — in  the  molten  planets,  in 
the  substance  of  the  earth,  in  the  structure  of  plants, 
of  animals,  of  man,  and  the  explanation  which  they  can 
not  or  will  not  give,  we  supply  in  one  word,  GOD. 
Differentiations  also  arose  somehow  in  governments, 
manners,  societies,  natural  religions,  labor,  language, 
arts,  sciences ; and  the  explanation  so  carefully  sup- 
pressed here  is  MIND.  It  is  like  God,  and  therefore 
cause.  There  is  nothing  dynamic  in  any  of  its  laws  or 
methods  ; the  true  Sum^ug  is  in  mind  itself.  All  secular 
Progress  is  at  once  both  its  movement  and  its  monu- 
ment. For  natural  or  supernatural,. all  improvement 
must  be  ; that  of  secular  human  history  is  only  super- 
natural, if  you  choose  to  call  mind  supernatural. 


* Since  this  lecture  was  delivered,  a passage  in  Dr.  Shedd’s  History 
of  Christian  Doctrine  has  come  to  my  notice,  in  which  the  distinction 
between  development  and  improvement  is  recognized.  Vol.  I.,  pp.  15-’ 
18.  In  his  own  use  of  the  word  “ development’*  (historical  instead  of 
scientific),  it  is,  however,  “synonymous  with  corruption  and  decline, 
as  well  as  with  improvement.”  Progress  is  not. 


32 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


I mean  mind  here,  of  course,  as  dowered  and  pre- 
pared of  God  for  Progress,  and  especially  as 
possessed  of  certain  intuitions  and  impulses.  Those 
of  order  and  fitness  have  their  sphere,  but  that  of 
perfection  is  the  commanding  one.  Every  great  form 
of  human  action  is  presided  over  by  one  of  these 
royal  and  inspiring  intuitions,  as,  of  justice  in  the 
realm  of  society  and  government,  beauty  in  that  of 
taste  and  art,  right  in  that  of  morals  and  religion ; but 
perfection  reigns  over  them  all.  Each  is  more  than 
an  idea,  it  is  an  intuition  and  an  impulse  ; it  has  its 
realm  in  the  thoughts  and  also  in  the  active  powers. 
No  generalization  from  experience,  external  or  in- 
ternal^ ever  gave  us  the  idea  of  perfection,  for  it 
could  not  be  generalized  from  the  imperfect;  no 
observed  or  conscious  achievement  of  the  imperfect 
ever  gave  us  the  prompting  to  attempt  the  perfect 
in  anything.  It  is  only  as  standards  or  models  in 
thought  and  expression,  in  act  and  character,  touch 
(they  cannot  do  more)  the  Divinely  provided  and 
primary  notion  of  the  perfect,  in  man’s  soul,  that  they 
stimulate  it  to  strenuous  and  successful  imitation. 
It  is  only  as  they  disclose  that  they  fall  below  it, 
that  his  own  grand  and  ever  unattained  ideal  moves 
man  to  emulate  them.  He  has  a tendency  to  advance., 
because  he  has  a tendency  to  realize  his  ideals. 
Without  that,  all  his  achievements  and  even  his 
short-comings  were  inexplicable  and  impossible  as 
such;  not  even  the  theory  of  their  supernatural 
origin  would  work. 

And  I mean  mind,  moreover,  as  placed,  circum- 
stanced, and  governed  of  God ; its  intuitions,  im- 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


33 


pulses,  and  laws  freely  working,  and  yet  within  the 
natural  limits  of  His  restriction,  correction,  stimula- 
tion, and  overruling.  In  its  main  direction,  society 
neither  drifts  nor  is  driven  ; it  is  guided.  Up  to  a 
certain  point  the  analogy  between  creation  and  human 
history,  a movement  onward  and  upward  in  both,  is 
bright  and  clear.  The  differences  between  changing 
flora  and  fauna  become  greater  with  each  descending 
stage  of  time  ; and  something  like  this  is  discernible 
in  the  successive  stages  of  civilization.  Whether 
barbarians  can  raise  themselves  out  of  barbarism  at 
all  or  not,  the  analogy  may  hold.  ” The  flrst  step  is 
the  difficulty,”  says  Archbishop  Whatley,  arguing 
that  they  cannot.*  But  however  the  difficulty  was 
surmounted,  mind  must  have  been  in  itself  not  less  at 
first  than  it  is  now,  nor  less  brooded  over  by  God.  It 
seems  probable,”  says  the  last  volume  of  ” Smithso- 
nian Contributions,”  " that  the  progress  of  mankind 
was  greater  in  degree,  and  in  the  extent  of  its  range 
in  the  ages  of  barbarism,  than  it  has  been  since  in 
the  ages  of  civilization,  and  that  it  was  a harder, 
more  doubtful,  and  more  intense  struggle  to  reach 
the  threshold  of  the  latter,  than  it  has  been  since  to 
reach  its  present  status.”  The  instinct  of  perfection, 
then,  the  moral  impulses,  the  help  of  God  which 
joins  on  to  these,  must  have  been  as  great  and  as 
clear  to  man  in  the  beginning  as  to-day.  The  only 
Natural  Law  of  Progress  which  we  affirm,  is  God’s 
Law,  — fact,  rule,  and  force,  all  emanate  at  last  from 
Him.  Both  this  world  and  man  have  their  pre-con- 

^London  Y.  M.  Chr.  Assoc.  Lect.  1855,  ‘‘  On  the  Origin  of  Civiliza- 
tion.” 


3 


34 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


formation  to  improvement  — the  one  active,  the 
other  passive,  — from  His  hand.  Even  savage  tribes 
attempt  to  perfect  something,  handiwork  at  least, 
though  not  all  the  same.  They  show  the  inchoate 
and  partial  working  of  a natural  law.  To  be  without 
this  would  be  more  than  to  be  without  culture  and 
integrity ; viz.,  to  be  without  a human  nature  imag- 
ing God’s  at  all.  I take  this  to  be  the  meaning  of 
Dr.  McCosh,  when  he  says  that  ” our  advancement  in 
knowledge  and  refinement  is  evidently  pre-deter- 
mined  by  God,  for  it  is  probably  the  result  of  agen- 
cies which  He  has  instituted.”  It  is  clearly  the 
thought  of  Bishop  Butler,  — " This  much  is  mani- 
fest, that  the  whole  natural  world  and  government 
of  it  is  a scheme  or  system,  not  a fixed,  but  a pro- 
gressive one,  — a scheme,  the  operation  of  which 
takes  up  a great  length  of  time  before  the  ends  they 
tend  to  can  be  attained.”  Even  Archbishop  Whate- 
ly,  arguing  that  man  never  originated  civilization, 
affirms  that  ” the  tendency  towards  progressive  im- 
provement ” is  ” characteristic  of  our  species.” 
Human  society,”  he  says,  "may  be  compared  to 
some  combustible  substances  which  will  never  take 
fire  spontaneously,  but  when  once  sent  on  fire,  will 
burn  with  continually  increasing  strength.  A com- 
munity of  men  requires,  as  it  were,  to  be  kindled, 
but  requires  no  more.”  " There  is  no  art  that  man 
may  not  have  invented,  supposing  him  to  have  a cer- 
tain degree  of  mental  cultivation  to  start  from.” 

VI.  It  may  now  be  assumed,  that  the  Natural 
Law  of  Progress,  which  is  divine,  is  clearly  estab- 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


lislied,  and  it  only  needs  that  the  Christian  Law  be 
truly  and  accurately  stated,  in  order  to  an  easy 
adjustment  between  them.  There  is  little  here  to  be 
done,  because  of  the  convincing  manner  in  which  the 
Christian  Law  has  been  maintained  here  in  former 
years,  by  the  first  lecturer  of  1870  and  the  last  of 
1871.  Fact,  rule,  aiid  force,  have  been  established, 
and  I have  only  to  point  out  what  is  peculiar  to  each 
as  Christian. 

But  one  word,  first,  on  the  question.  Why  is  there 
a Christian  Law  of  Progress  at  all?  Simply  for 
this  one  reason,  that  the  Natural  Law  does  not  work, 
morally  and  spiritually.  Nothing  is  plainer  in  the 
natural  h istory  of  mankind,  than  that  the  improvement 
it  shows  elsewhere  does  not  obtain  in  ethics  and  reli- 
gion, aside  from  Christianity.  Mr.  Buckle’s  much- 
contested  axiom,  that  morals  are  stationary,  is  true 
enough  as  natural  fact  alone,  and  hardly  need  have 
been  so  disputed;  but  it  is  not  true  as  Christian 
fact.  All  races  go  far  enough  on  this  side,  to  prove 
that  they  have  a moral  nature  and  have  the  same. 
Exactly  the  reverse  of  what  Whately  maintains  on  the 
secular  side  is  here  true ; they  have  something  to 
start  from,  but  no  tendency,  to  use  Lord  Bacon’s 
phrase,  "then  to  make  progression.”  One  word,  one 
phenomenon,  explains  the  ethico-spiritual  paralysis 
of  the  great  Law  of  Progress,  — Sin.  Without  sin, 
improvement  on  that  side,  instead  of  being  last  and 
least,  would  have  been  as  obvious  as  any  other. 

" The  one  obstacle  that  comes  between  man  and  his 
end,”  said  Dr.  Hopkins  last  year,  "is  Sin.”  Hence 
a new  Law,  with  new  and  unique  results.  We  were 


36 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


made  originally  under  one  Law,  Divinely  intended  to 
be  both  secular  and  religions  ; and  just  as  plainly  as 
we  see  that  it  still  works  on  the  one  side,  we  see  that 
it  does  not,  save  as  exceptionally  replaced,  on  the 
other.  Christianity  itself  silently  recognizes  its 
w^orking  in  secular  things,  for  it  does  not  propose  to 
reinstate  it  there,  else  would  it  be  science,  art,  and 
all  beside,  as  well  as  religion.  It  equally  recognizes 
that  the  Law  has  been  overthrown  in  our  spiritual 
nature,  by  undertaking  so  to  re-establish  it  there, 
that  it  may  be  said  truly  : " the  righteous  shall  hold  on 
his  way,  and  he  that  hath  clean  hands,  grow  stronger 
and  stronger  ” ; ” the  path  of  the  just  is  as  the 
shining  light  that  shineth  more  and  more  unto  the 
perfect  day.” 

(1.)  And  now  as  to  the  peculiar  facts  of  Christian 
Progress.  New  and  beautiful  forms  of  virtue  have 
been  created  by  the  Gospel.  ” Toleration,”  says  the 
''  Westminster  Eeview,”  denying  Buckle’s  axiom,  ” is 
the  result  of  something  else  than  mere  scepticism, 
and  is  a modern  idea.”  " Humanity,”  says  Max  Mul- 
ler, " is  a word  you  look  for  in  vain  in  Plato  or  Aris- 
totle, an  idea  of  Christian  growth,  and  the  science  of 
Mankind  is  a science  which,  without  Christianity, 
would  never  have  sprung  into  life.”  Mr.  Fronde 
mentions  the  disinterested  disposition  which  devo- 
tion to  science  produces,  valuing  knowledge  for  its 
own  sake,  and  asking  no  reward,  as  " the  only  real 
and  undeniable  progress  ” that  we  are  making  through 
science  ; but  this  is  only  the  shadow  of  a whole  new 
character  supremely  consecrate  to  truth,  love,  and 
goodness,  which  the  work  of  Christ’s  religion  dis- 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


37 


closes.  Or,  descending  to  common  facts,  Christian 
experience  is  an  incontestable  and  patent  fact,  which 
not  even  a Comte  could  deny,  in  a community  like 
that  of  Boston,  Avithout  risking  his  reputation  for 
either  honesty  or  sanity ; and  Christian  believing, 
Avhich  must  be  either  part  of  it  or  root  of  it,  and 
Christian  living,  which  is  fruit  of  both,  are  also  facts, 
and  all  three  facts,  no  matter  what  becomes  of  Posi- 
tivism, to  be  accounted  for  hy  some  law  and  some 
power  in  action.  It  would  require  exemplary  hardi- 
hood to  deny  that  a statement  like  that  of  our  learned 
fellow-countryman,  Dr.  Henry  B.  Smith,  to  the  Evan- 
gelical Alliance  at  Berlin,  of  the  growth  of  Protestant 
Christianity  in  the  world,  involves  a signal  increase 
of  common  Christian  morality,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
higher  and  finer  virtues.  So  of  the  statement, — 
which  I am  not  able  to  verify, — that  our  increase  of 
population  in  the  first  fifty  years  of  this  century  was 
four-and-a-half-fold,  while  that  of  Christian  persons 
was  nine-fold.  ''  The  Christian  church  throughout  the 
world,”  said  the  "Westminster  Review,”  last  April, 
" was  never  in  so  advanced  and  favorable  a condition, 
and  never  embraced  so  many  elements  of  hope,  as 
at  present.” 

(2.)  Of  the  rule  involved  in  Christian  Progress ; 
the  principles  of  order  or  method.  If  the  laws  of 
human  nature  are  employed,  they  clearly  are  not  used 
in  the  ordinary  way.  The  new  facts  imply  both  new 
processes  and  new  ends.  Christian  experience  is  in 
some  sense  a supernatural  fact,  and  it  is  illogical  not 
to  recognize  supernatural  methods  behind  it.  In  it, 
the  laws  of  human  nature,  which  had  been  under 


38 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


paralysis,  are  made  to  work  as  they  never  would  by 
nature.  We  have  still  the  ideal  of  the  perfect,  though 
never  spiritually  employed ; we  have  all  the  intui- 
tions of  natural  reason,  and  the  accelerating  facility 
of  habit;  else  no  leverage,  no  basis  of  operations. 
The  capacity  for  improvement  is  no  part  of  that 
image  of  God  that  was  lost  in  the  Fall,  for  God  is 
not  improvable.  Mind,  and  moral  distinctions  must 
have  been  from  the  first,  as  now,  in  order  to  progress 
on  any  supposition,  by  evolution,  by  primitive  reve- 
lation or  by  natural  law.  The  Eemedial  System  is 
itself  proof  that  there  is  somewhat  in  us  yet  for 
Progress  to  hold  by,  else  why  sermons  inan^  pul- 
pit, ''to  the  Natural  Man?”  It  is  part  of  the 
evidence  of  a grand  original  intention,  thwarted 
now  in  spiritual  things,  whose  failure  therefore, 
has  to  be  remedied.  "A  true  theology  is  nec- 
essary to  all  spiritual  improvement  at  least;  and 
it  implies  natural  faculties,  for  the  discovery  and 
recognition  of  religious  truth,  but  faculties,  that 
under  sin,  must  be  cleansed  and  quickened  and  illu- 
minated. " Holiness  to  the  Lord,”  is  no  word  of 
mere  ethics.  "Perfect  in  the  will  of  God,”  is  never 
the  aim  of  natural  civilization.  There  are  new  truths 
required  and  disclosed  here,  in  which  is  the  starting 
point  of  the  new  advance  of  mankind,  for  with  them 
is  the  beginning  of  goodness  toward  God,  and  there 
cannot  be  a better,  until  there  is  first  a good.  The 
old  selfish,  utilitarian  uses  of  even  first  principles  are, 
under  the  Christian  Law,  superseded.  Good  acquires 
another  and  a higher  meaning ; even  right  is  another 
thing  under  revelation.  And  with  this  new  furniture 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW. 


39 


of  ideas  and  aims,  all  the  mental  laws  work  in  other 
and  higher  channels  than  before. 

(3.)  Of  the  force  involved.  It  is  the  Spirit  of 
God,  as  in  the  Natural  Law  of  Progress  it  is  the  mind 
of  man.  The  principle  of  parsimony  here  again  admits 
but  one  force  or  power  in  action ; it  must  be  mind, 
and  it  cannot  be  human.  Then,  logically,  it  is  God. 
Or,  if  you  say  Christ,  that  is  logically  the  same 
thing.  "Between  man  and  his  end,  sin  intervenes, — 
that  only,”  said  Dr.  Hopkins.  The  religion  which 
begins,  proceeds,  and  concludes  with  the  removal  of 
sin,  and  that  sets  up  an  ideal  of  perfection  in  goodness 
which  neither  philosophy  nor  religion  ever  shadowed 
or  hinted  before,  must  be  Divine.  To  improve 
one’s  mere  condition  may  be  selfish  : to  improve  one’s 
character  in  disinterested  righteousness,  is  itself  dis- 
interested. It  must  be  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life 
in  Christ  Jesus,  which  can  make  either  the  individual 
or  society  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death.  Social 
enthusiasms,  in  other  civilizations,  can  be  ascribed  to 
Natural  Law,  like  that  for  " wisdom  ” among  caste- 
Egyptians,  for  art  or  philosophy  among  certain 
Greeks,  for  civil-service  qualifications  among  the 
Chinese;  but  not  a social  enthusiasm  for  holiness, 
such  as  emerges  alone  in  Christian  civilization. 

Such  is  the  Christian  Law  of  Progress, — its  facts 
peculiar,  its  methods  peculiar,  its  force  peculiar. 
Mere  secular,  i.  e.,  partial  progress,  under  the 
Natural  Law,  necessitates  it.  That  is  supplemented, 
not  superseded  by  this.  Progress  is  both  qualitative, 
— as  to  what  sort  of  capabilities  in  us  are  improving, 
and  quantitative, — as  to  how  many.  Man  may  be 


40 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


rising  in  some  directions,  and  yet  sinking  in  only 
one  that  is  more  important;  he  may  be  sinking 
on  the  whole,  his  apparent  elevation  being  not  really 
such,  any  more  than  that  of  a body  immersed  in 
water,  turning  upward  as  it  goes  down.  The  Natural 
Law,  however,  does  not  require,  as  the  Naturalistic 
does,  that  Progress  should  be  proven  of  every  epoch, 
of  every  nation,  of  every  man.  The  race  advances, 
as  armies  sometimes  do,  through  an  enemy’s  country, 
by  sections ; first  one  division  or  brigade  or  regi- 
ment, and  then  another.  Nor  is  it  necessary,  under 
Natural  or  Christian  Law,  to  prove  that  every  move- 
ment is  in  itself  an  advance,  for  many  must  have 
for  their  immediate  object  only  to  gain  position,  as 
armies  do  by  flank  on  battle-fields,  or  ships  by  tack 
at  sea.  But  if  most  things  progress,  provided  they 
be  the  highest,  all  will,  ere  long.  Yet,  neither  kind 
of  improvement,  secular  nor  spiritual,  can  take  the 
place  of  the  other,  or  fail  to  languish  alone.  The 
secular  dies,  dissevered  from  the  spiritual ; and 
upward  religious  movements,  separated  from  thought 
and  cultur^e,  lapse  into  barbarism,  and  illustrate  the 
truth  that  there  is  dead  weight  enough  in  barbarism 
to  sink  and  destroy  them.  We  need  both  Laws. 
And  as  partial  Progress  must  always  be  lower 
Progress,  the  new  and  supplementary  Law  must  be 
a higher  one  for  the  higher  nature.  Omnipotent  in 
its  own  domain,  improvement  in  the  man  or  the 
masses,  can  never  be  complete  without  it.  For 
he  and  they  whose  civilization  is  not  spiritual, 
must  have  a spiritual  nature  uncivilized.  As  morals 
cannot  produce  taste,  or  taste  morals,  or  culture 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LA  W. 


41 


unselfish  love,  so  neither,  nor  anything  beside,  can 
produce  religious  virtue,  which  is  necessary  not  only 
to  a ]3erfect  being,  but  to  a truly  exalted  specimen 
of  an  imperfect  one.  Giving  all  other  agencies  their 
due  place,  of  our  Keligion  we  sing 

“ If  thou  take  thy  grace  away, 

Nothing  pure  in  us  shall  stay.” 

But  Christianity  cannot  be  required  to  abolish  all 
wrong  at  any  one  place  or  time,  — for  it  takes  effect 
on  human  character,  not  on  human  nature,  — or  to 
give  us  a perfect  generation  of  men ; for  each  gener- 
ation has  to  begin  with  the  rudiments  in  morals,  as 
with  the  alphabet  in  learning,  and  this  under  a heri- 
tage of  sin ; while  the  outrages  of  Communists  and 
the  "Ku  Klux,”  private  assassinations  in  our  cities, 
and  the  daily  record  of  violence  and  treachery, 
prove  man’s  nature  still  depraved.  But  Chris- 
tianity has  already  made  some  crimes  and  sins  un- 
known ; and  age  by  age  — for  this  is  slow  work,— 
is  doing  away  with  others.  The  signs,  every  day 
multiplying,  of  its  becoming  the  universal  morality 
and  religion,  are  simply  signs  that  Progress  will 
some  day  reach  high-water  mark  on  the  shores  of 
time. 

VII.  And  here,  to  draw  the  lines  of  adjustment 
closer,  observe,  that  the  first  fruit  of  Christianity  in 
society  is  not  a civilization,  but  a righteousness, 
growing  out  of  a new  principle  of  personal  holiness. 
I object  strongly  to  the  wide  and  inaccurate  sense  in 
which  the  phrase  ” Christian  civilization”  is  used. 


42 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


Nothing  is  correctly  classified  under  it  which  is  not  the 
fruit  of  Christian  righteousness.  Also  observe  that 
this  righteousness  always  and  everywhere  naturally 
produces  a civilization,  though  no  civilization,  not 
even  the  Jewish,  has  ever  yet  naturally  produced  a 
Christianity;  and  yet  that  was  the  purest  civiliza- 
tion in  history,  and  really  religious ; though,  as  has 
been  said  of  morality,  only  the  fruit  on  the  lower 
branches  of  the  Christian  tree. 

Implant  the  new  spiritual  ideal  in  man,  and  it  will 
awaken  all  other  ideals  in  him.  It  will  revive  the 
Natural  Law  of  Progress  in  whatsoever  it  has  been 
suspended.  The  fountain  of  ” sweetness  and  light,” 
of  strength  and  beauty,  it  is  both  complement  and 
ally  of  all  other  good  agencies,  doing  for  men  what 
they  cannot  do,  setting  them  all  upon  the  doing  of 
what  they  can.  Again  observe,  — and  this  is  a rela- 
tion of  Christianity  to  secular  Progress  ever  over- 
looked,— it  helps  all  other  agencies,  byrestraining 
as  well  as  by  stimulating  them,  by  guiding  them 
away  from  over-action  and  excess,  by  fastening  upon 
the  refinements  and  enjoyments  of  all  culture  the 
clog  of  wholesome  self-denial,  by  severely  repressing 
whatever  would  overlay  and  crush  its  own  high  ends, 
and  spoil  culture  itself,  by  preventing, — to  use  a 
Western,  Home-Missionary  patriarch’s  curt  phrase, — 
our  being  ''  civilized  to  death.”  It  does  more  for  the 
commonwealth,  to  touch  the  name  etymologically,  by 
checking  the  passion  for  wealth,  than  unrestrained 
avarice  ever  could.  It  saves  civilization  itself  from 
growing  thin,  and  strengthless ; it  Leeps  the 
stamen  good.  There  is  no  element  of  natural  well- 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


43 


bciiiir  or  character  to  which  a restraining^  hand  is 
not  indispensable,  and  there  can  be  none  like  that 
of  a Divinely-communicated,  ^remedial,  merciful 
religion.  If  mere  civilization  is  not  to  run  out  and 
become  effete  on  its  own  line,  it  must  have  both  spur 
and  check.  How  far  Christianity  may  go  in  this 
direction,  of  secular  benefit,  no  man  can  tell ; but 
neither  any  other  religion  nor  atheism  goes  in  this 
direction  at  all ; and  we  may  say,  with  reverence,  that 
a true  religion  would  have  the  marks  of  just  such  an 
influence  upon  the  course  of  secular  things  as  are 
shown  by  Christianity  alone.  It  has  already  gone  so 
far  that  in  Christendom  it  is  impossible  entirely  to 
extricate  the  workings  of  its  own  Law  and  those  of 
the  Law  of  Nature  from  each  other ; and,  while  anal- 
ysis should  give  us  two  distinct  classes  of  resulting 
facts,  there  is  a third  in  which  the  two  blend  inextri- 
cably, which  is — beyond  statement,  — larger  than 
either.  And  once  more  observe,  that  though  itself, 
in  its  substance,  not  a subject  of  improvement,  but 
complete, — ^yet  it  is  the  most  progressive  religion  in  its 
unfolding  to,  and  application  by  man,  of  all  the  ages. 
In  this  respect,  as  in  prophecy,  it  has  ” a springing 
and  germinant  fulfilment.”  In  these  things,  also,  is 
the  secret  of  the  notable  fact,  that  nothing  beside  can 
so  support, “complete,  perpetuate  or  resuscitate  civili- 
zation. It  can  arrest  mortal  decay,  which  nothing 
else  can ; it  alone  has  the  power  of  resurrection  after 
death.  All  unchristian  improvement,  being  partial, 
is  therefore  temporary.  The  lower  faculties  can  be 
kept  up  to  their  highest  mark  — even  reason  itself, 
only  provided  the  uppermost  ones,  which  are  the 


44 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


spiritual,  are  quickened  and  set  forward.  Those 
hang  upon  these.  For,  if  perfection  could  exist  alone 
in  anything,  it  could  not  long,  without  perfection  of 
character;  and  this  must  sustain  lower  progress  while 
it  is  reaching  perfection,  if  it  ever  can.  And  so 
necessary  is  Christianity  to  give  direction  and  pro- 
portion to  Progress,  that  unless  it  is  subordinating 
all  else  to  those  elements  in  man  which  are  highest 
and  grandest,  such  Progress,  whether  begun  by 
accident,  by  genius,  by  selfishness,  or  by  science,  is 
doomed  first  to  stagnate,  then  to  rot,  and  then  to 
disappear,  and  the  race  with  it.  In  what  has  just 
been  said  lies  also  the  secret  of  the  familiar  fact 
that  missions  preceding  other  civilizing  agencies  in 
heathen  lands  are  always  more  powerful  and  suc- 
cessful civilizers  than  they. 

VIII.  This  adjustment  between  the  two  Laws  has 
been  shapen  expressly  and  equally  to  avoid,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  speculative  theories  which  resolve 
all  Progress  into  material  necessity  — dissipating 
all  rationale  and  all  cause  into  thin  air,  and  leaving 
mere  physical  fact ; and,  at  the  other  extreme,  those 
dogmatic  theories  which  deny  any  Natural  Law,  and 
that  there  is  any  Progress  save  through  Christianity. 
Dr.  Lord  held  this  last  in  its  most  obnoxious  and  un- 
tenable form ; viz.,  that  the  earth  itself  has  a broken 
constitution ; all  things  upon  it  are  disordered,  sub- 
ject to  decline  and  dissolution — particularly  man  and 
the  animated  creatures  nearest  in  order  to  him  — 
and  there  are  no  exceptions  ” ; and  that  God’s  deal- 
ings with  all  races  and  ages,  our  own  included,  have 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


45 


been  ” strictly  and  universally  in  accordance  with  the 
law  of  decline  and  fall.”  But  as  he  also  held  that/ 
under  Christianity,  temporary  improvements  may 
take  place,  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  any  other  sup- 
position of  an  exclusively  supernatural  law  differs 
from  his,  save  in  the  connected  interpretations  of 
prophecy.  In  any  form,  it  lands  its  champions  in  a 
ludicrous  self-contradiction,  in  that  they  also  contend 
that  literature  and  art,  at  least,  reached  a perfection 
never  to  be  equalled  in  Greece  and  Eome,  ^.  e.,  with- 
out Christianity.  If  this  would  show  that  the  mod- 
ern Christian  nations  have  no  law  of  literary  and 
artistic  progress  to  speak  of,  it  would  also  imply  that 
some  of  the  ancients  had  one,  and  lost  it  for  the  race  ! 
Sir  William  Temple  capped  the  climax  of  this  absurd- 
ity by  maintaining,  with  great  fervor  and  grace  of 
style,  that  human  degeneracy  is  constant,  and  "the 
oldest  books  in  every  kind  are  the  best,”  laying  him- 
self out  largely  on  the  spurious  and  worthless  letters 
of  Phalaris,  as  an  exquisite  and  crowning  example. 
If  anything  could  possibly  surpass  this,  it  was  the 
position  of  Dr.  Lord,  that  emancipation  was  an 
instance  of  all  sorts  of  social  and  moral  deterioration, 
and  that  slavery  has  a place  somewhere  in  the  moral 
government  of  God.  The  dogmatic  theory,  in  any 
form,  ignores  the  manifest  and  noblest  characteristics 
of  the  hurhan  mind,  some  of  the  brightest  prophecies 
of  its  immortality,  and  one  of  the  choicest  proofs  of 
our  holy  religion.  It  denies  that  civilization  before 
or  aside  from  Christianity  is  civilization,  that  partial 
Progress  is  Progress ; which  it  is  perilous  for  a 
scholar,  at  least,  to  deny.  The  adjustment  here  in- 


46 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


dicated,  recognizing  the  Natural  Law  as  of  God, 
accounts  for  separate  and  independent  civilizations,  as 
in  Greece,  India,  Egypt,  and  in  China,  at  this  moment 
(a  civilization  that  can  no  more  be  classed  with  oth- 
ers, than  its  language  can  be),  for  the  state  of  these 
now,  and  for  the  lack  of  civilization  elsewhere.  It 
accounts  equally  for  both  the  progressiveness  and 
the  unprogressiveness  of  men ; and  for  the  relapses 
of  Christian  and  heathen  nations.  It  recognizes  the 
unquestionable  fact  that  the  stagnant  heathen  races 
were  once  rising  and  moving  forward,  and  shows 
why,  and  how,  they  came  to  a dead  stop.  The  Nat- 
uralistic Law  cannot  do  this  at  all ; the  Christian  Law 
alone,  the  Natural  Law  alone,  cannot.  The  true 
Doctrine  of  Progress  must  do  justice  to  both  Laws, 
for  both  are  necessary  to  human  perfection,  and  both, 
of  God.  It  is  as  useless  to  substitute  one  for  the 
other,  as  a pen  for  a spade  in  farming,  or  a gun  for  an 
axe  in  carpentry.  It  is  as  useless,  to  ascribe  to  the 
one  what  is  due  to  the  other,  as  to  refer  the  multi- 
plication table  and  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  to  a 
common  origin,  or  either  to  the  other.  The  true 
Doctrine  is  neither  exclusively  natural  nor  supernat- 
ural, but  inclusively  both.  Suum  cuique.  To  Caesar 
the  things  that  are  Caesar’s,  to  God,  the  things  that 
are  God’s.  It  gives  Christianity  its  proper  glorj^, 
— neither  too  much  nor  too  little.  Possibly  as  ” the 
ultimate  fact  of  astronomical  science,”  in  the  words 
of  the  Duke  of  Argyle,  ”is  not  the  law  of  gravita- 
tion, but  the  adjustment  between  this  law  and  others 
which  are  less  known,  'so  in  the  science  of  man,  the 
basis  of  harmony  now  sketched  out,  is  one  which  ail 


AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  LAW, 


47 


parties  in  relation  to  the  Christian  Religion  may  be 
tardy  in  coming  together  upon.  Perhaps  all  Chris- 
tian thinkers  must  come  to  it  first,  before  Naturalis- 
tic ones  can  be  expected  to  do  so.  The  adjustment 
is  not  needed,  indeed,  for  the  two  great  Divine  Laws 
themselves,  only  for  our  understanding  of  them.  They 
adjust  themselves,  facts,  methods,  and  forces,  to  each 
other  every  hour.  In  Christendom,  at  least,  each 
leans  upon  the  other.  Every  Christian  person  has 
the  direct  benefit  of  the  Natural  Law;  every  un- 
Christian  person  has  much  indirect  and  secondary 
benefit,  at  least,  of  the  Christian  Law.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  select  any  examples  of  secular  improvement, 
in  which  forces  that  are  Christian  may  not  be 
blended. 

But  I must  relieve  your  exemplary  patience  with 
the  tardy,  but  sincere  confession  of  the  temerity  of 
discussing  a theme  so  broad  and  deep,  in  this  centre 
of  Puritan  civilization,  on  the  part  of  one  whose  home 
is  far  from  great  libraries  in  Western  wilds.  I have 
written  in  sight  of  the  ruins  of  a college  conflagration, 
not  helpful  to  close  or  even  hopeful  thought,  and  my 
manuscript  seems  to  me  to  carry  the  smell  of  fire. 
But  the  Doctrine  here  advanced  is  certainly  the  basis 
of  all  hope  for  the  good  time  coming,  of  ” sweeter 
manners,  purer  laws.”  It  augurs  the  regeneration 
of  society,- — not  its  degeneration.  It  holds,  with 
”the  noblest  nations,”  as  Bunsen  expresses  it,  to  ” an 
immutable,  moral  order  of  the  world,  constituted  by 
Divine  wisdom,  and  regulating  the  destinies  of  man- 
kind,” to  nil  eternal  order,”  in  which 'Hruth,  justice, 
wisdom,  and  moderation  are  sure  to  triumph ; and 


48 


THE  NATURAL  LAW  OF  PROGRESS 


that  when  the  contrary  appears  to  be  the  case,  the 
fault  lies  in  our  mistaking  the  middle  for  the  end.’^ 
It  is  both  rational  and  reverent.  It  traces  all  real 
advance, — in  the  last  analysis, — all  its  laws  and  all 
its  forces,  to  the  Law-giver  and  the  Force-giver.  It 
finds  security  for  all  virtue,  learning,  piety,  and 
well-being  in  His  stately  purpose.  He  garners  the 
fruits  and  sows  the  seeds  of  all.  He  keeps  His  own. 
''  Civilizations  have  foundered ; civilization  itself, 
never.”  Christian  civilization,  its  truer  and  bet- 
ter self,  never  can.  We  say  with  emphasis  in  the 
Christian  ages, 

“ The  drops  run  past  us,  but  the  river  stays.” 

Let  us  look  forward.  Let  even  our  errors  be  the 
errors  of  Christian  progressives,  never  those  of 
reactionists.  They  will  be  fewer,  and  they  will  be 
safer.  ” A man  may  fall  forward,”  wrote  our  famous 
John  Robinson,  in  one  of  a series  of  essays  worthy 
to  take  place  beside  those  of  Bacon,  " and  in  so 
doing,  endanger  his  hands  and  face ; but  in  falling 
backward,  the  danger  is  far  greater,  as  we  see  in  old 
Eli,  of  whom  we  read,  that  he  fell  backward,  and  his 
neck  brake ^ and  he  died.”  Let  us  carry  onward  the 
light  of  virtue  and  truth  as  far  as  we  may,  for  it  is 
like  the  torch  in  the  hand  of  the  Greek  runner,  who 
bore  it  till  he  was  spent,  and  then  handed  it  to 
another,  who  bore  it  farther  on.  It  is  my  faith  that 
it  will  continue  to  be  so,  for  it  always  has  been ; and 
ever 

Glimpses  on  my  sight, 

Through  present  wrong  the  eternal  right. 

And  step  by  step,  since  time  began, 

I see  the  steady  gain  of  man.” 


II. 


CHRISTIAN  DO*CTRINE  THE  MOLD  OF  CHRISTIAN 
CHARACTER. 

That  which  a man  holds  by  the  head,  and  by 
heart,  as  the  truth,  vital  to  his  soul’s  want,  that 
properly  is  his  Creed.  It  is  to  him  the  supreme 
truth,  felt  to  be  such,  and  grasped  with  a clear  com- 
pleteness of  conviction,  and  held  with  a trustful  hold- 
ing worthy  to  be  termed  in  such  matter  a Faith.  It 
is  the  truth  he  has  found  true  to  his  spiritual  needs ; 
the  truth,  or  scheme  of  truths,  if  it  be  such,  that  ver- 
ifies itself  to  his  craving  heart,  as  measuring  and 
answering  his  sense  of  trouble  and  wrong,  his  felt 
sin  and  conscions  guilt.  He  has  found  and  embraced 
it  as  the  Adequate  Truth  that  opens  to  his  soul  the 
Way  and  the  Life. 

That  is  the  man’s  Creed ; and  less  than  this  will  ever 
be  found  to  lack  somewhat  that  essentially  belongs 
to  the  full  significance  of  that  term.  No  man  pro- 
perly has  a creed,  till  in  his  deepest  soul  he  beholds, 
owns,  welcomes,  trusts  the  truth  that  meets  his  want, 
and  delivers  himself  over,  heartily  obedient  to  that 
truth.  He  may  have  had  his  little  experiments  at  a 
Faith,  his  notional  admissions  of  truth,  endemic  or 
4 


50 


CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 


inherited;  he  has  felt  the 'sting  of  sin,  the  ache  of 
conscience,  the  power  of  an  endless  life,  and  so  may 
have  speculated  quite  religiously,  and  set  in  order 
certain  wisdoms  that  his  soul  has  within  reach  in  its 
serious  moods ; some  theory  of  bread,  when  his  hun- 
ger shall  grow  too  sharp  ; his  scheme  of  the  infinite 
when  his  finite  shall  fail  him ; and  he  wraps  these 
thin  persuasions  about  him  as  a religion.  But  with 
all  these,  he  has  not  attained  to  a Faith.  Creed, 
properly,  he  has  none,  and  little  more  than  the  ele- 
ments and  preparations  of  one. 

For  what  truth  soever  a man  heartily  entertains, 
on  terms  that  entitle  it  to  be  called  his  Faith  or 
Creed,  is  not  held  simply,  but  itself  holds  him  as 
with  sovereign  power  of  possession.  It  receives  him, 
and  proceeds  to  fashion  the  character  and  life  to  its 
own  pattern.  What  is  thus  really  in  the  creed  passes 
into  the  man,  holding  the  heart,  and  working  trans- 
formingly  from  that  centre.  And  the  much  we  are 
wont  to  say  and  hear  of  faiths  and  creeds,  as  far  less 
than  this,  should  raise  the  doubt,  whether  things,  as 
well  as  words,  are  not  losing  their  meaning  with  us. 

This  power  of  heartily  believed  truth  to  mold  and 
stamp  the  believer  with  its  own  image,  is  very  im- 
pressively recognized  and  declared  in  Romans  6 :17. 
There  was,  upon  this  company  of  Roman  disciples,  a 
certain  image  and  superscription  of  grace,  so  peculiar 
and  so  clearly  enstamped,  that  the  Apostle  knows 
them  by  that  manifest  token  to  be  children  of  God. 
He  sees  and  recognizes  upon  them  the  authentic 
stamp  of  the  genuine  believer.  ” Fe  have  obeyed 
from  the  heart  that  form  of  doctrine  which  wasdeliv- 


OF  CHRISTIAN  CHARACTER. 


51 


ered  7jou”  What  was  this  imprint  of  the  Faith,  this 
seal  and  certificate  of  grace,  so  visible  and  infallible  ? 
And  how  was  it  produced  ? 

The  Apostle  rests  this  confidence  that  these  disci- 
ples are  believers  indeed,  on  a certain  evident  fact, 
which  he  gives  us  in  this  passage,  but  which  is  very 
imperfectly  reported  in  our  version.  Indeed,  the 
failure  to  give  us  in  this  passage  the  exact  utterance 
of  the  Spirit  is  so  great  and  obvious,  and  the  Divine 
thought  is  so  richly  significant,  when  truly  reported, 
that  we  may  well  take  it  in  these  juster  terms,  which  all 
criticism  approves  and  to  which  interpreters  consent : 
Ye  have  heartily  obeyed  that  mold  of  doctrine 
INTO  WHICH  YE  WERE  DELIVERED.  This,  then,  was 
the  distinguishing  fact : The  Christian  Truths,  heart- 
ily believed,  had  made  their  own  distinctive  mark  on 
them.  The  Christian  Doctrine  had  reeeived  these 
obedient  souls,  and  charactered  them  with  its 
proper  imprint.  And,  by  that  mark,  he  knew  them  to 
be  believers  indeed,  and  also  knew  what  creed  alone 
could  make  that  mark. 

For,  as  men  fashion  a mold,  tracing  in  it  the  typo 
of  figure  and  feature  which  they  seek  to  form,  and 
deliver  into  this  the  fused  metal  that  it  may  obey  this 
model  and  take  from  it  the  very  lineaments  designed, 
so  in  this  new  creating  of  sonls  after  Christ,  the 
Spirit  has  set  in  order  the  things  of  Christ,  the  Chris- 
tian Truths,  to  be  a mold  of  the  Christian  character 
and  life  — each  peculiar  Christian  fact  and  doctrine  set 
in  its  fit  place  and  proportion,  each  having  its  own 
proper  stamp  to  impart,  eaeh  essential  to  the  com- 
pleteness of  that  life  and  character  which  shall  bear 


52 


CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 


throughout  the  Christly  impress  and  so  be  distinct- 
ively Christian  — and  altogether  constituting  the 
exact  archetype  and  mold  of  what  the  Christian  shall 
be ; and  this  not  as  a mere  furniture  of  opinion  which 
the  man  has  caught  or  cogitated,  but  a veritable 
Creed  of  his,  a scheme  of  felt  and  believed  Truth, 
taking  possession  of  him,  a receptacle  of  motives  that 
are  quick  throughout  with  the  plastic  Spirit  of  Christ, 
into  which  the  soul  is  delivered  by  faith,  as  the  fused 
metal  into  the  mold,  that  the  very  seal  and  stamp  of 
Christ  may  be  struck  all  around  on  the  heart  and  life. 

Such,  in  formal  statement,  is  the  divine  thought  of 
this  passage ; and  it  goes  to  the  heart  of  this  whole 
question  of  the  formation  and  evidence  of  the  Chris- 
tian character.  It  defines  very  clearly  the  place  and 
function  of  the  truth  in  spiritual  changes,  and  the 
nature  and  efllcacy  of  genuine  faith. 

That  this  representation  stands  in  no  mere  figure, 
but  reports  the  very  method  of  God  in  the  handling 
of  souls,  will  be  plain  from  many  scriptures.  See 
how  in  other  passages,  here  and  there,  every  point 
in  this  picture  is  divinely  attested.  How  largely  we 
are  taught  that  the  gracious  work  of  the  delivering 
and  transforming  Spirit,  in  every  stage  and  aspect  of 
the  saving  process,  is  instrumented  evermore  by  the 
truth  — that  by  the  truth,  clasped  home  by  faith,  the 
soul  lying  in  sin  is  first  startled,  convinced,  slain  — 
then  begotten  anew,  quickened,  renewed,  edified, 
reconstructed,  sanctified,  saved.  This  shaping  pres- 
sure is  ever  recognized.  The  passages  in  proof 
scarcely  need  to  be  recited.  Recall  only  these : 
God’s  perfect  law  enlightening  the  eyes,  making  wise 


OF  CHRISTIAN  CHARACTER. 


53 


the  simple,  converting  the  soul.  Ps.  19  : 7,8.  Of 
His  own  will  begat  Pie  us  by  the  word  of  truth. 
James  1 : 18.  We  are  begotten  through  the  Gospel. 
1 Cor.  4 : 15.  And  so,  being  born  again,  not  of 
corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible,  by  the  Word 
of  God,  which  liveth  and  abideth  forever,  ye  have 
purified  your  souls  in  obeying  the  truth  through  the 
Spirit.  1 Pet.  1 : 22,  23.  Sanctify  them  through 
thy  truth.  John  17  : 17.  I am  the  Way,  the  Truth, 
and  the  Life.  John  14:  6.  We  learn  Christ,  put- 
ting off  the  old  man,  which  is  corrupt  according  to 
the  deceitful  lusts,  being  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  our 
mind,  and  being  taught  as  the  truth  is  in  Jesus. 
Eph.  4 : 21,  24.  If  ye  continue  in  my  word,  then 
are  ye  my  disciples  indeed ; and  ye  shall  know  the 
truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free.  John  8 : 
31,  32.  In  all  this  process  the  Spirit  of  truth  takes 
of  the  things  of  Christ  and  shews  them  to  the  believ- 
ing; John  16  : 13,  15  ; and  the  bearing  of  the  obe- 
dient soul  while  so  learning  Christ  and  passing  over 
to  be  a new  creature  in  His  likeness,  is  described  as 
walking  in  the  truth,  and  abiding  in  the  doctrine  of 
Christ.  2 John : 4,  9. 

We  find,  then,  the  representation  of  this  passage 
to  be  no  mere  touch  of  casual  imagery.  It  lies 
broadly  bedded  in  the  whole  body  of  kindred  Scrip- 
tures. It  covers  this  general  result : That  the  Truth 
which  the  soul  finds  true  to  its  deepest  needs,  and 
receives  with  such  hearty  belief  as  deserve's  the  name 
of  Faith,  holds  the  believer  henceforth  in  its  em- 
brace, as  the  mold  clasps  the  delivered  metal,  and 
characters  him  with  its  own  impress. 


54 


OERISTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 


But  it  is  more  than  any  such  general  doctrine  of 
the  office  and  power  of  truth  that  the  Apostle  de- 
clares. He  discerns  in  these  disciples  a certain 
unique  and  remarkable  character,  not  the  religious 
merely,  but  a singular  grace  and  exaltation  of  that ; 
and  the  mold  of  doctrine,  which  alone  could  strike 
this  shape  and  stamp,  is  surely  more  than  the  old 
forms  of  truth.  It  is  the  Christian  Doctrine  that  has 
wrought  this  Christian  Character,  and,  at  sight,  he 
recognizes  in  them  the  new  stamp  of  the  new  mold. 
The  Law  could  not  do  this.  Here  is  more  than 
Pharisaism  ever  conceived.  This  is  not  that  abund- 
ant religiousness  which  blooms  here  and  there  on 
rare  natures,  as  the  fruit  of  culture,  and  an  exact 
conscience.  A new  and  higher  cast  of  character  is 
here ; and  manifestly  it  is  the  Gospel  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  it  is  the  Christ  that  has  given  Himself  in 
new  grace  and  truth  to  men,  that  is  working  this  new 
phase  of  spirit  and  life.  In  that  mold  these  souls 
have  taken  this  impress. 

No  man  knew  better  than  did  Paul  himself,  the 
power  of  this  new  and  perfecting  truth  as  it  is  in 
Christ.  He  speaks  in  this  whole  passage  out  of  his 
own  deep  consciousness  of  the  necessity  of  this 
Christian  molding,  and  of  his  own  blessed  experi- 
ence of  it.  All  that  he  had  been  as  the  superlative 
legalist,  moral,  conscientious,  religiously  straitened 
on  all  sides, — all  this  had  been  softened  and  tem- 
pered. The  Spirit  of  Truth  had  been  showing  him 
the  things  of  Christ.  In  vain  he  had  wrestled  with 
the  new  revelation  ever  since  that  day  when  he  stood 
by,  and  held  the  garments  of  them  that  stoned 


OF  CHRISTIAN  CHARACTER, 


55 


Stephen ; till  at  length  all  had  been  utterly  fused 
by  that  epiphany  of  the  risen  Christ  that  flamed  on 
him  on  the  way  to  Damascus.  From  that  hour  all 
that  self-competent  and  most  religious  Saul  that  he 
had  been,  was  delivered  into  the  mold  of  these  new 
truths  of  Christ;  and  there  had  come  forth  this 
Christian  Paul  as  the  result.  He  knew  in  himself 
this  new  creation  in  Christ  Jesus.  And  out  of  this 
experience  he  speaks  now,  recognizing  in  these  souls 
the  same  spiritual  reconstruction,  the  same  Christly 
stamp,  struck  only  by  these  Christian  Truths  on 
souls  divinely  tempered  and  submitted  to  that 
shaping. 

The  distinctive  Christian  Truths,  then,  are  de- 
signed and  employed  by  the  Spirit  of  God  as  the 
perfect  mold  of  Christian  character  and  life. 

(1.)  Looking  now,  first,  at  this  Gospel  Doctrine, 
as  properly  the  revelation  of  grace  and  truth,  in  the 
person  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  recognize  it  at 
once  as  the  wisdom  and  power  of  God  for  the  deliv- 
erance and  salvation  of  believing  souls.  It  is  fitted 
and  adequate  to  that  effect.  The  soul  that  once 
takes  to  heart  these  truths  as  true  and  vital  to  its  felt 
want,  and  so  makes  these  its  veritable  creed,  and 
fairly  delivers  itself  to  their  transforming  power,  will 
infallibly  be  wrought  over  into  just  that  new  crea- 
ture in  Christ  which  the  saved  sinner  is  represented 
to  be.  He  will  surely  be  renewed  after  the  image 
of  the  Christ  who  thus  clasps  him  all  about  in  the 
embrace  of  His  truth,  being  changed  into  the  same 
image  from  glory  to  glory,  even  as  by  the  Spirit  of 
the  Lord.  Given  the  cause,  we  know  the  effect. 


56  ^ CHItlSTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 

Inspecting  the  die,  we  know  the  impression  it  will 
strike. 

Look  now  into  this  mold  of  Christian  Doctrine. 
Observe  these  deep  lines,  these  bold  reliefs.  The 
supreme  facts  are  all  here.  Our  sin,  God’s  pity  and 
remedy,  divinely  ordered  and  proportioned,  besetting 
us  on  every  side  of  our  need.  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh, — the  Incarnate  Son  of  God,  in  travail  of  love 
for  us  lost,  living  our  human  life,  dying  our  death, 
risen  now  and  throned  for  us, — the  atoning,  teach- 
ing, sympathizing  Christ  Jesus,  who,  in  this  ministry 
of  the  divine  fulness  to  all  our  want,  is  made  unto 
us  wisdom,  and  righteousness  and  sanctification  and 
redemption,  and  so  a Savior  to  the  uttermost ! Trace 
out  the  design  to  the  last  touch  that  adds  grace  to 
virtue.  From  this  perusal  of  the  mold  alone,  even 
beforehand,  if  no  Christian  had  ever  been  seen  by  us 
in  actual  development,  we  could  forecast  with  entire 
assurance  what  manner  of  man  he  must  needs  be  in 
all  holy  conversation  and  Christ-likeness,  who  should 
be  wrought  to  this  pattern.  If  these  truths  take 
effect,  the  product  will  be  the  Christian  character. 
Each  truth  will  leave  its  proper  mark,  its  own 
authentic  character,  on  the  believer.  The  material 
will  be  human  still,  taking  and  holding  the  impress 
with  varying  degrees  of  completeness  and  perfection  ; 
but  so  far  as  he  obeys  this  mold  of  doctrine,  the 
style  of  the  man  will  be  none  other  than  a copy  of 
Christ. 

(2.)  We  may  also  reason  from  the  effect  to  the 
cause,  and  infer  quite  completely  for  substance  the 
whole  Gospel  from  the  character  it  produces.  Given 


OF  CHRISTIAN  CHARACTER. 


57 


the  Christian  man,  bearing  this  evangelical  stamp 
of  grace  in  his  spirit  and  conversation,  and  we  know 
what  he  has  been  heartily  believing,  what  vital,  rea- 
lized and  obeyed  truths  have  been  fashioning  him  to 
that  beauty  and  strength.  He  is  what  obedience  to 
those  truths  through  the  Spirit  has  made  him.  He 
is  the  product  of  his  Faith.  For  the  instrumental- 
ity and  motive  pressure  in  all  spiritual  changes  are 
lodged  in  the  truth. 

As,  therefore,  from  the  figure  enstamped,  we  know 
what  must  have  been  the  fashion  of  the  die  that 
struck  it ; as  the  casting  betrays  its  mold,  so  that 
point  by  point  you  refer  each  feature  to  the  particular 
configuration  of  the  model  that  shaped  it,  — so  the 
Christian  man  is  formed  by  his  Christian  creed.  We 
can  trace  each  gracious  peculiarity  to  the  truth  that 
wrought  it.  And  none  other  than  this  very  doctrine 
of  Christ,  as  given  in  the  Gospel,  could  form  such  a 
character  as  this. 

It  would  even  be  quite  possible  in  this  way  to  con- 
struct ideally  the  very  mold  of  motive  requisite  for 
the  production  of  a character  so  unique.  At  least  in 
its  leading  elements  we  could  discover  the  Gospel 
from  the  Christian  man.  This  Believer,  so  stamped 
with  the  evangelic  virtues  — what  creed  has  been 
his  to  save  him  so  ? The  naturalist  derives  from  a 
single  plant  or  animal,  or  even  from  a single  organic 
part  of  such,  the  whole  main  world  of  plastic  agencies 
that  conditioned  and  produced  it.  By  the  same  pro- 
cess, take  this  assemblage  of  characteristic  Christian 
traits,  or  even  any  one  of  them  that  is  vital  — take 
this  temper  and  life  of  unselfishness,  this  consecration 


58 


CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 


of  love,  this  penitential  humility,  this  joy  of  pardon 
and  conscious  recovery  to  goodness,  this  assiduity  of 
loved  service  toward  God  and  man,  this  felt  personal 
union  to  an  infinite  friend  — such  a character,  or  any 
one  trait  that  is  of  its  substance,  reveals  again  this 
very  Gospel.  The  marks  of  the  Lord  Jesus  are  on 
it  throughout.  And  seeing  this  saved  sinner  so 
struck  through  and  printed  over  with  the  Cross,  we 
thus  judge  that  One  has  died  for  him ; that,  once 
dead,  he  lives  henceforth  a redeemed  life,  not  unto 
himself,  but  under  constraint  of  His  love  Who  died 
for  him  and  rose  again.  To  be  such  as  he  is,  he 
must  have  been  such  a sinner  so  saved. 

And  with  insight  only  a little  deeper  we  might  go 
very  far  to  discover,  from  inspection  of  any  marked 
unchifistian  life  and  character,  what  has  been  believed 
instead  of  the  Christian  truth  — what  shape  of  error, 
what  misbelief  the  man  has  been  harboring  and  obey- 
ing, to  make  him  what  he  is.  For  men  show  their 
faith  by  their  works,  and  the  character  betrays  the 
creed. 

(3.)  This  process  is  verified  in  the  experience  of 
believers.  The  Christian  is  conscious  of  this  doc- 
trinal pressure  in  conforming  him  to  Christ.  He 
feels  these  influences  of  precept  and  principle  touch- 
ing him  all  round  about  with  gracious  compulsions, 
and  sweetly  constraining  him  out  of  the  old  into  some 
blessed  newness,  assimilating  him  to  Jesus.  These 
Christian  doctrines  warn  him,  instruct  him,  correct 
him  in  righteousness.  By  these  he  is  enlightened, 
guided,  strengthened,  moved  evermore  to  holy  aspi- 
rations and  amendments.  He  feels,  and  has  all  along 


OF  CURISTIAN  CHARACTER, 


59 


felt,  this  Word  of  God  pressing  him  on  every  side, 
quick,  piercing  soul  and  spirit,  and  discerning  the 
thoughts  and  intents  of  his  heart.  lie  is  conscious 
that  every  spiritual  change  in  him  has  been  by  obey- 
ing the  truth  through  the  Spirit.  In  a word,  he  finds 
himself  delivered  by  his  faith  into  the  mold  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine,  and  that  he  can  have  no  rest  in  it  but 
by  heartily  obeying  it.  And  so  doing,  the  believing 
soul  takes  shape  and  feature  after  the  likeness  of  his 
Lord. 

This  view  of  Christian  Doctrine,  as  holding  such 
place  and  power  in  God’s  scheme  for  renewing  and 
saving  the  lost,  invests  it  with’  a dignity,  and 
demands  for  it  an  honor,  which  it  too  often  lacks  in 
our  regard. 

Clearly,  this  Truth,  then,  is  a quite  de^nite  and 
positive  matter,  standing  fast  in  the  radical  facts  of 
man’s  sin,  and  God’s  movement  of  grace  for  our 
recovery.  These  are  unchanging,  true  and  the  same 
ever  and  to  all,  vitally  true  to  every  sinning  soul  of 
man.  They  must  be  believed,  trusted,  obeyed,  in 
order  to  salvation,  as  the  multiplication-table  must  be  ' 
believed  and  obeyed  for  just  reckoning,  or  as  that  fire 
burns,  food  nourishes,  unsupported  bodies  fall,  must 
be  held  and  heeded  in  order  to  safe  living.  Believe 
otherwise  than  that  our  sin  is  so  mischievous, 
criminal  and  deadly,  God  so  holy  and  just,  and  in 
Christ  so  gracious,  as  this  Gospel  declares,  and  your 
fiction  though  never  so  sincerely  believed,  will  be  a 
creed  of  death.  We  are  to  be  saved  by  the  truth  as 
it  is  in  Jesus,  and  not  otherwise;  and  Doctrinal 
Christianity  is  the  clear  and  authentic  revelation 


60 


CimiSTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 


of  this  saving  Christ  in  His  Life,  Teachings,  and 
Death  for  us. 

And  as  this  mode  of  Christian  doctrine  is  so  defi- 
nite and  substantive,  the  Christian  character  is  equally 
positive  and  peculiar.  The  apostolic  test  is  deci- 
sive : it  is  a character  conformed  to  the  truth  of 
Christ,  true  to  that,  marked  by  it,  grace  for  grace. 
Genuine  religion  lies  in  hearty  obedience  to  the 
revealed  will  of  God.  It  is  a renovating  and 
transforming  energy  ever  working  the  soul  to  this 
Divine  pattern.  Does  the  character  answer  to  the 
mold,  then?  In  spirit  and  life,  is  the  man  formed 
anew  in  the  image  of  the  truth  ? Do  these  specific 
Gospel  facts  and  principles  reappear  in  him,  each 
enstamping  its  own  figure  of  grace  ? Only  so  is  it 
the  Christian  character,  and  only  so  is  it  to  be  surely 
discerned. 

Of  course  this  peculiar  character  is  substantially 
one  and  the  same  in  all  believers.  The  same  image, 
struck  with  varying  degrees  of  clearness  and  fulness, 
is  on  them  all.  They  are  from  one  mold,  and 
answer  to  its  configuration.  They  cannot  fail  to 
wear  certain  unmistakable  stamps  of  it.  Amid  all 
varieties  of  temperament,  culture,  and  condition,  the 
same  image  and  superscription  will  distinguish  them. 
Defective  the  impression  may  be*,  in  the  filling  up, 
in  some  of  the  finer  lines,  the  material  being  more 
or  less  fiuent  and  facile.  But  certain  positive  char- 
acteristics, the  authentic  signatures  of  the  Christly 
model,  will  surely  be  there. 

It  deeply  concerns  us  to  hold  fast  this  view  of  the 
positive  and  distinctive  character  in  the  Christian 


OF  CHRISTIAN  CHARACTER. 


G1 


believer.  Drifting  from  this,  and  accepting  any  other 
test  than  this  visible  conformity  to  the  Christian 
Truth,  adopting  any  scheme  that  liberalizes  us  away 
from  this  Divine  Redeeming  Christ  into  natural  mo- 
ralities and  pious  sentimentalism,  we  have  changed 
our  star  and  are  sailing  toward  wreck.  The  broad, 
clear  separateness  of  the  renewed  from  the  unrenewed 
will  be  confused  and  lost.  V^ery  widely  this  tendency 
is  working.  It  has  provided  this  broad,  debatable 
ground  of  religious  equivalents  and  christianistic 
indifferences,  thronged  by  a multitude  claiming  the 
Christian  name,  of  every  variety  of  opinion  and  every 
corresponding  shade  of  nebulous  piety.  But  the 
twilight  of  this  liberalism  ever  deepens  toward  the 
darkness  of  scepticism  and  infidelity ; and  he  who  is 
once  quit  of  the  truth,  will  be  found  not  far  from  as 
Christless  in  his  character  as  he  is  in  his  creed. 
Surely  God’s  grace  in  saved  sinners  is  no  such  shad- 
owy and  indefinite  somewhat,  one  thing  here,  another 
there,  to  be  verified  nowhere.  The  Christian  is  a 
marked  man.  From  a single  unique  feature  in  a 
mold,  you  could  declare  among  a thousand  which 
was  the  one  casting  that  came  of  it ; and  surely  from 
these  deep-cut  and  distinctive  lines  of  Christian  doc- 
trine, indubitable  prints  will  appear  on  the  soul  that 
has  obeyed  them. 

And  the  deliverance  of  a soul  into  this  embrace 
and  molding  power  of  the  truth  — the  softening  of 
the  hard,  stiff  nature  into  that  plastic  state  of  contri- 
tion and  pliancy  to  holy  motive,  in  which  it  yields 
itself  fluently  in  hearty  obedience  to  the  truth  — this 
is  the  gracious  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  that  expe- 


62 


CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE  TEE  MOLD 


rience  wliicli  we  term  conviction  of  sin.  This  is  the 
significance  of  that  season,  which,  however  it  vary  in 
its  fashion,  is  ever  the  voice  of  One  crying  in  the 
wilderness  of  sin  and  preparing  the  way  of  God’s 
grace  in  the  soul.  In  that  furnace  the  stony  heart 
is  melted  and  the  will  suppled  to  divine  shaping. 
Here  we  learn  the  knowledge  of  sin  and  the  depth  of 
our  entanglement,  and  come  to  cry.  Oh,  wretched  — 
who  shall  deliver?  and  so  pass  to  the  no  condemna- 
tion in  Christ  Jesus.  It  is  an  indispensable  lesson. 
For  the  completeness  of  this  preparatory  experience 
determines  not  only  the  genuineness  of  the  conver- 
sion, but  the  style  of  all  later  developments  of  gra- 
cious character.  Not  only  the  broad  and  plenary 
conversion,  but  every  subsequent  stage  of  grace,  will 
bear  witness  in  the  sharp,  clear  stamp  of  the  mold, 
how  fluent  the  soul  was  made  under  the  strivings  of 
the  convincing  Spirit. 

One  great  reason  of  the  defective  and  unshapely 
character,  often  seen  in  real  Christians,  is  to  be  found 
in  their  incomplete  and  partial  views  of  truth.  A 
full  and  symmetrical  piety  requires,  for  its  develop- 
ment, the  intelligent  and  hearty  holding  of  the  Chris- 
tian truths  in  their  completeness,  each  in  place  and 
proportion.  Drop  out  one,  and  its  mark  is  missing. 
One  part  of  the  mold  is  lacking,  and  its  appropriate 
stamp  does  not  appear.  Vague  notions  of  truth  can 
yield  only  blurred  impressions.  Pet  doctrines, 
fondly  exaggerated,  misshape  to  their  own  dispro- 
portion. Error  deforms.  Hence  come  distortion, 
an  erring  conscience,  instability;  for  there  needs  the 
close,  full,  uniform  clasp  of  the  truth,  with  equable 


OF  CimmTIAN  CHARACTER. 


63 


touch  and  pressure,  all  round  about  the  soul,  to  give 
it  symmetry,  and  completeness  in  Christ.  Only  as 
it  is  thus  broadly  bedded  in  the  fulness  of  truth,  can 
a character  attain  to  the  perfect  poise  of  steadfast 
faith  and  virtue.  And  we  may  see  how  close  we  are 
upon  profane  implications  when  we  presume  to  clas- 
sify God’s  revelations  of  truth,  these  as  essential, 
those  important,  others  more  or  less  considerable. 
There  is  not  one  of  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel 
that  can  be  ranked  as  unimportant,  or  non-essential. 
Every  one  of  them  has  its  essential  purpose  and  effi- 
ciency. God  would  give  no  unimportant  truths. 
Each  enters  as  a divine  touch  into  the  perfect  mold 
of  doctrine,  and  is  essential  to  the  unity  of  the  faith, 
and  the  integrity  of  the  Christian  man,  in  the  meas- 
ure of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ.  The 
whole  body  of  character  can  be  fitly  joined  together 
and  compacted  only  by  that  which  every  joint  sup- 
plieth,  according  to  the  effectual  working  in  the  meas- 
ure of  every  part.  All  are  profitable  for  doctrine, 
reproof,  correction,  instruction  in  righteousness ; 
that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  thoroughly  fur- 
nished unto  all  good  works. 

How  false  and  pernicious,  then,  is  that  sentiment 
which  resents  all  definitive  doctrine,  and  denounces 
creeds  as  logically  impertinent  to  character  ! It  finds 
expression  in  a great  variety  of  forms,  and  in  all  the 
dialects  of  disbelief  and  misbelief,  uttering,  all,  this 
ultimate  maxim  of  liberalism  and  very  creed  of 
infidelity : All  faiths  are  indifferent,  all  creeds  an 
impertinence  ; what  signify  a man’s  beliefs  or  disbe- 
liefs, so  he  but  lives  well?  '^His  can’t  be  wrong. 


64 


CimiSTIAN  DOCTRINE  THE  MOLD 


whose  life  is  in  the  right.”  And  deeper  than  they 
mean  or  know,  it  is  true  after  all ; for  a little  farther 
down,  at  the  bottom  of  that  well,  you  reach  this  cen- 
tral truth,  that,  " If  any  man  will  do  God’s  will,  he 
shall  know  of  the  doctrine.”  But  the  meaning  is  that 
all  this  notion  of  an  essential  orthodoxy,  a positive 
truth,  a faith  inherently  right  or  wrong,  is  simply  the 
dream  of  fanaticism ; that  a creed  is  a speculation, 
and  faith  a fancy,  having  little  or  nothing  to  do  in  de- 
termining the  character  and  life ; that  it  matters  little 
whether  the  truth,  if  such  a thing  there  really  be,  or 
something  else  than  that,  be  held.  And  having  thus 
resolved  to  gather  figs  of  thistles,  one  has  it  in  order 
next  to  doubt,  seeing  what  thistle-fruit  it  is  we  get 
so,  whether  there  be  really  any  such  thing  as  figs, 
after  all.  We  must  even  our  liberalism  all  through. 
Is  it  not  part  of  the  same  illusion,  that  there  is  any 
essential  good  or  evil  in  conduct  and  character? 
And  so  men  are  adrift,  to  believe  as  they  please,  and 
to  live  as  they  list.  Whereas,  that  order  of  thought 
is  simply  preposterous.  It  matters  all  in  the  world 
what  a man  does  really  believe,  and  so  hold  as  to 
bring  it  vitally  home  to  his  soul.  What  he  believes, 
molds  him  in  spirit  and  in  life.  The  connection  is 
deeply  logical  and  practical  between  a man’s  real 
faith  and  his  character.  For  what  the  Believer 
believes,  is  not  to  him  simply  a formulated  specula- 
tion, but  a vital  power  and  a formative  principle.  He 
is  the  last  man  to  be  trusted  with  an  error ; another 
might  play  fast  and  loose  with  it,  but  he  will  be  it  and 
do  it,  perfecting  his  faith  by  his  works.  The  very 
roots  of  the  character  and  life  run  down  thus  into 


OF  CHRISTIAN  CHARACTER. 


65 


the  subsoil  of  a man’s  faith.  And  it  were  no  more 
preposterons  in  logic  or  false  to  fact  to  say,  No  mat- 
ter about  the  mold,  if  the  casting  only  come  right, 
than  to  say.  No  matter  what  a man  believes,  if  only 
he  be  right ! The  casting  is  what  the  mold  makes  it. 
The  Christian  is  what  the  Christian  faith  makes 
him. 

How  precious,  then,  is  doctrinal  knowledge  1 The 
Christian  believer  is  delivered  into  the  mold  of  so 
much  truth  as  he  intelligently  holds  and  truly  be- 
lieves. He  obeys  only  so  much  as  he  knows,  and  as 
he  knows  it.  Only  that  much  can  touch  the  char- 
acter and  order  the  life.  And  to  yield  the  true 
character  it  must  be  the  very  truth,  whole  and  only. 
So  much  as  he  takes  home  by  the  intellect  and  heart 
as  true  and  vital  to  his  soul’s  need,  will  have  him  in 
shaping.  Truth  unknown  cannot  influence  him. 
Partial  trnth  will  give  partial  results,  and  may  even 
have  the  mischievous  force  of  error.  Every  believer, 
therefore,  should  seek,  as  for  priceless  treasure,  to 
be  well  and  broadly  grounded  in  doctrine,  ever  veri- 
fying his  creed  by  the  studied  Word,  intent  to  know 
accurately  and  obey  heartily  the  whole  Gospel  of 
trnth.  And  all  the  apparatus  of  culture,  provided 
of  God  to  our  need,  has  its  dignity  of  office  and 
honor  and  power  in  its  relation  to  the  truth.  The 
Church  is  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth.  The 
Christian  Ministry  is  a Teaching  Ministry,  and  fills 
the  New  Testament  idea  in  heralding,  manifesting, 
rightly  dividing  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  What  else 
can  it  be,  then,  than  Doctrinal  preaching,  in  the  fair 
breadth  of  that  term  ? What  other  than  Doctrinal 


66 


miRISTIAN  DOCTRINE. 


can  be  Practical  preaching?  Doctrine  is  the  basis 
of  duty.  Truth  has  its  issues  in  the  life.  What 
else  can  we  hopefully  preach,  in  its  length  and 
breadth  of  application,  for  shaping  the  inner  and  the 
outer  life  of  men  to  the  mind  of  God  ? 

More  than  ever,  then,  let  us  prize  and  honor  God’s 
Truth,  and  give  it  in  our  esteem  the  large  place  God 
has  given  it  in  His  method  of  salvation.  Let  us  trust 
it  as  God’s  own  power  and  wisdom,  mighty  through 
Him  to  the  pulling  down  of  all  strongholds  of  sin, 
and  to  the  upbuilding  of  all  Christian  grace  and  good- 
ness,— the  very  mold  in  which  Christly  character  is 
to  be  cast.  And  count  those  worthy  of  double 
honor  who  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS;  ITS  APOLOGETICAL 
VALUE. 

BY  REV.  "WILLIAM  F.  WARREN,  D.D.,  DEAN  OF  THE  BOSTON  UNIVERSITY 
SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

^ 'ELEMENT  of  Alexandria,  in  the  curious  treatise 
Vy  which  he  fittingly  styled  his  "Patch-work,”  among 
a multitude  of  equally  suggestive  observations,  has 
given  us  this : " There  is  a difference  between  that 
which  one  saith  of  the  truth,  and  that  which  the  truth 
saith  of  itself.”  His  meaning,  psychologically  stated, 
is,  that  there  is  a wide  difference  between  a clear  per- 
ception that  a thing- appears  to  be  true,  and  a clear 
perception  that  it  is  true.  The  distinction  is  as  im- 
portant as  it  is  just.  The  two  mental  acts  or  states 
are  separated  by  an  interval  broader  than*  that 
bounded  by  the  Sakwala  of  the  Buddhist  universe. 
The  difference  is  not  merely  that  between  a " perhaps  ” 
and  a " verily,”  it  is  all  the  difference  between  ad- 
mitted ignorance  and  conscious  knowledge. 

Now,  just  corresponding  to  this  radical  antithesis, 
we  find  in  the  field  of  Christian  Apology  two  drifts 
of  thought,  two  endeavors,  two  variant  conceptions 
of  the  work  of  the  Christian  Apologist.  The  one 
party  aims  to  produce  belief,  the  other  to  produce 
knowledge.  The  one  deals  in  likelihoods,  reasona- 

67 


68  ^ THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS! 

blenesses,  arguments,  evidences ; the  other  in  spirit- 
ual realities  as  objects  of  spiritual  cognition.  The 
one  appeals  to  the  understanding  and  asks  a judg- 
ment favorable  to  the  claims  of  Christianity;  the 
other  appeals  to  the  spiritual  faculties  and  to  their 
normal  use  promises  personal  knowledge.  The  one 
method  can  never  carry  a mind  beyond  a certain 
favorable  poise  of  the  librating  judgment,  mathemati- 
cally represented  at  any  given  moment  by  the  sum 
of  perceived  probabilities  in  favor  of  the  Christian 
system,  minus  the  sum  of  perceived  probabilities 
against  it.  In  this  position  one  new  fact  may  suffice 
to  shift  the  preponderance  of  probability  and  change 
the  favorable  judgment.  In  the  other  case,  there 
being  true  knowledge,  no  further  knowledge  can 
make  the  first  untrue.  All  added  facts  but  enlarge 
and  perfect  the  original  knowledge.  Paley  is  a 
classical  representation  of  the  first  of  these  tenden- 
cies, Pascal  of  the  second. 

Now,  without  denying  the  legitimacy  of  the  purely 
argumentative  school  of  Apology,  or  disparaging  any 
real  services  which  it  may  have  rendered  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Church,  we  certainly  may  claim  for  that 
perpetual  vindication  of  Christianity  which  proceeds 
upon  the  idea  of  bringing  men  to  Jcnow  the  truth,  a 
far  higher  aim  and  a far  superior  power.  To  justify 
this  estimate  it  is  only  necessary  to  look  into  the 
distinctive  peculiarities  of  the  Christian  t3rpe  of 
religious  consciousness,  and  to  mentally  connect  them 
with  the  principal  functions  of  Christian  Apology. 

What,  then,  are  the  distinctive  peculiarities  of  the 
Christian  consciousness  ? 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE. 


69 


To  begin  at  the  bottom,  we  need  to  observe,  that 
every  man  has  some  sort  of  a religious  consciousness. 
By  virtue  of  his  intellectual  constitution,  each  must 
have  a more  or  less,  distinct  realization  of  personal 
religious  beliefs,  impulses,  acts.  The  beliefs  may 
be  true  or  false,  the  impulses  strong  or  weak,  the 
acts  right  or  wrong;  but  whatever  they  are,  the 
mind  takes  cognizance  of  them,  as  clearly  and  neces- 
sarily as  of  any  other  mental  phenomena.  What- 
ever a man  believes,  he  knows  he  believes  ; whatever 
a man  loves  or  fears,  he  knows  he  loves  or  fears ; 
whatever  a man  worships,  he  knows  he  worships. 
No  man  can  be  religious  or  irreligious  without  know- 
ing it.  Whichever  he  is,  he  is  it  consciously, 
lieligious  consciousness  is,  therefore,  as  universal  as 
religion  and  irreligion. 

The  broadest  and  most  fundamental  distinction  in 
the  religious  consciousness  of  men,  is  that  resulting 
from  their  differing  conceptions  of  the  universe 
of  being.  A theistic  conception  of  the  universe 
produces  a theistic  type  of  religious  consciousness,  a 
pantheistic  conception  a pantheistic  type,  a polythe- 
istic conception  a polytheistic  type,  ap  atheistic  con- 
ception an  atheistic  type.  These  types  of  religious 
consciousness  differ  as  widely  from  each  other  as 
would  four  universes  answering  to  the  four  intellec- 
tual conceptions.  Indeed,  they  are  so  incompatible 
with  each  other,  that  it  is  almost  impossible  for  a 
man,  in  whom  either  type  is  fully  developed,  to 
realize  to  himself,  even  in  imagination,  the  world  of 
religious  ideas,  emotions,  and  volitions  in  which  a 
mind  ^Dossessed  of  one  or  the  other  types,  lives  and 


70 


THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 


moves.  Thus  a genuine  theist  finds  almost  as  great 
difficulty  in  entering  into  the  real  religious  thought 
and  feeling  and  life-sphere  of  a genuine  pantheist, 
as  he  does  in  entering  into  the  real  thought  and  feel- 
ing and  life-sphere  of  an  elephant.*  In  like  manner 
the  fetish-worshipper  has  no  more  idea  of  the  religious 
consciousness  of  the  theist,  than  he  has  of  the  scien- 
tific or  cosmological  consciousness  of  the  modern 
astronomer,  to  whom  night-fall  is  the  dawn  of  the 
true  day,  and  the  circling  earth  itself  but  the  flag- 
ship of  a celestial  Coast  Survey. 

Less  broadly,  yet  not  less  clearly  distinguished 
are  the  sub-types  of  religious  consciousness  devel- 
oped under  the  influence  of  the  great  historic  reli- 
gions of  the  world.  Thus  the  Jewish,  Chidstian,  and 
Mohammedan  varieties,  while  strongly  resembling 
each  other  in  all  that  distinguishes  them  as  a mono- 
theistic type,  are  yet  perfectly  distinct  when  com- 
pared among  themselves.  Similarly  we  find  that  no 
two  polytheistic  or  pantheistic  peoples,  or  sects,  ever 
developed  identical  forms  of  religious  consciousness. 
How  different  the  world  of  religious  realizations  in 
which  the  ancient  Hellenic  mind  moved,  from  that  in 
which  our  pagan  ancestors  of  Northern  Europe  lived  ! 
What  awkwardness  would  even  Spinoza  experience 
in  adjusting  his  God-consciousness  to  that  of  the 
worshipper  of  Brahma,  Vishnu,  Siva,  and  their  three 
hundred  and  thirty  millions  of  associate  divinities  ! 


* “Die  altern  kritiklosen  Zoographen  legten  dem  Elephanten,  * 
Tinter  andern  loblichen  Eigenschaften,  auch  die  Tugend  der  Religiositat 
bei ; allein  die  Religion  der  Elephanten  gehort  in  das  Reich  der  Fab- 
eln/’  Feuerbach^  Wesen  des  Christen thums,  S.  24. 


ITS  APOLOOETICAL  VALUE. 


71 


Each  consciousness,  however,  is  alike  pantheistic. 
So  the  atheistic  religious  consciousness  of  modern 
naturalism,  represented  by  such  men  as  Comte, 
Buchner,  and  Ilolyoake,  differs  as  radically  from  the 
atheistic  consciousness  of  original  Buddhism  as 
European  science  from  Asiatic  dreams. 

In  attempting  to  set  forth  the  leading  characteris- 
tics of  that  type  of  religious  consciousness  produced 
under  the  influence  of  the  Christian  religion,  it  will 
be  manifestly  proper  to  constantly  inquire  after  its 
ideal  or  normal  manifestation,  rather  than  any  defec- 
tive or  perverted  ones  in  this  or  that  individual  or 
sect.  For  this  ideal  or  normal  consciousness,  we 
shall  naturally  go  back  to  the  experiences  and  teach- 
ings of  the  original  founders  of  the  religion,  as 
these  are  reflected  in  their  extant  words.  In  doing 
this  we  assume  nothing  further  than  that  their  lan- 
guage as  truthfully  mirrors  their  mind  as  that  of 
other  men  is  taken  to  mirror  theirs. 

The  first  distinctive  trait  of  the  ideal  Christian 
consciousness,  I understand  to  be,  that  it  includes 
an  immediate  knowledge,  or  feeling,  or  realization 
of  some  kind,  of  personal  communion  with  God.  In 
such  a consciousness  there  is  an  immediate  realiza- 
tion, not  so  much  of  belief  in  God,  as  of  the  very 
presence  of  God.  The  man  is  eonscious  of  dwelling 
in  God,  and  of  God  dwelling  in  him,  of  loving 
God,  and  of  being  loved  and  blessed  of  him  in 
turn. 

’ This  mental  realization  of  personal  communion 
with  God,  was  exemplified  in  its  highest  perfection 
in  the  religious  consciousness  of  Jesus.  He  ever 


72 


THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS t 


seems  to  know  himself  the  beloved  Son,  in  whom 
the  Father  is  well  pleased.  With  the  most  unfalter- 
ing confidence,  he  affirms,  "I  do  always  those  things 
that  please  him.”  He  claims  that  the  divine  Spirit 
is  given  unto  him  without  measure ; that  he  lives 
and  teaches  and  heals  and  suffers  in  vital,  conscious 
union  with  his  Father.  He  speaks  indeed  of  having 
been  sent  forth  by  the  Father,  but  to  prevent  mis- 
apprehension, he  immediately  adds,  " He  that  sent 
me,  is  with  me.  The  Father  hath  not  left  me 
alone.” 

His  consciousness  of  the  Father’s  presence  amounts 
to  a consciousness  of  mutual  indwelling.  Rebuking 
the  dulness  of  Philip’s  spiritual  perception,  he  asks, 

" Believest  thou  not,  that  I am  in  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  in  me  ? ” His  words  and  works  are  not  his 
alone,  but  products  of  a joint-agency.  " The  words 
that  I speak  unto  you,  I speak  not  of  myself;  but 
the  Father,  which  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the 
works.”  " Believe  me,”  he  concludes,  " believe  me 
that  I am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me.” 
This  consciousness  finds  equally  explicit  expression 
again  and  again. 

Nor  does  it  appear  that  this  blessed  realization  of 
divine  fellowship  was  regarded  by  Christ  aa  a prerog- 
ative peculiar  to  himself.  Indeed,  he  promises  it  to 
his  disciples.  He  tells  them  of  some  mysterious 
change  which  is  to  come  over  them  after  he  is  gone.  ' 
He  gives  minute  directions  as  to  their  place  of  so- 
journ until  this  promise  shall  be  fulfilled.  " Tany 
ye  at  Jerusalem,  until  ye  shall  be  endued  with  power 
from  on  high.”  He  leads  them  to  expect,  along  with 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE. 


73 


this  mysterious  enduement,  a better  understanding 
of  much  he  had  taught  them,  a revelation  of  things 
they  could  not  at  the  time  of  the  promise  yet  " bear.” 
They  are  to  sustain  a new  relation  to  him,  to  enjoy 
more  of  his  prerogatives,  no  more  to  be  called  ser- 
vants, but  friends.  His  peace  is  henceforth  to  be 
given  unto  them,  his  Father  is  to  be  their  Father,  his 
God  their  God. 

These  wonderful  promises  certainly  contemplated 
a prospective  indwelling  of  God  in  their  souls,  and  a 
distinct  consciousness  on  their  part  of  fellowship  with 
him.  That  they  were  not  delusive,  the  whole  post- 
pentecostal  experience  of  those  disciples  abundantly 
proves.  No  sooner  had  they  been  endued  with  the 
fulness  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  than  they  betrayed  the 
possession  of  as  lively  a sense  of  God’s  presence  and 
love  as  ever  their  Master  had  done.  Their  confident 
declaration  was,  "Hereby  know  we  that  we  dwell  in 
him  and  he  in  us,  because  he  hath  given  us  of  his 
Spirit.” 

But  just  here  we  note  a peculiarity  which  forever 
differentiates  the  religious  consciousness  of  the  disci- 
ples from  that  of  the  Master.  Jesus  claimed  that  the 
Father  was  ever  with  him,  but  to  his  sorrowing  dis- 
ciples he  promises  not  only  the  presence  of  the 
Father,  but  also  his  own.  Indeed,  he  says  of  all  who 
love  him,  that  they  shall  enjoy  this  twofold  indwell- 
ing. "If  a man  love  me,  he  will  keep  my  words ; 
and  my  Father  will  love  him,  and  we  will  come  unto 
him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him.”  He  promises 
that  this  shall  be  not  only  a fact,  but  also  a fact  of 
consciousness.  " In  that  day  ye , shall  know  that  I 


74  THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 

am  in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me,  and  I in  you.”  In 
his  high  priestly  intercession  for  all  that  should  ever 
believe  on  him,  he  prays,  ” That  they  all  may  be  one, 
as  thou.  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I in  thee,  that  they 
all  may  be  one  in  Evidently,  Christ’s  idea 

was  not  that  his  disciples  were  simply  to  succeed  to, 
and  exactly  reproduce  his  perfect  consciousness  of 
the  Father’s  loving  presence  ; it  was  rather  that  they 
should  be  taken  up  into  this  joint  fellowship  of  Christ 
and  the  Father,  and  hold  communion  with  them  both. 

Exactly  corresponding  with  this,  we  find  the  sub- 
sequent experience  of  the  disciples.  One  of  them 
speaks  for  all,  when  he  says,  ''  Truly,  our  fellowship 
is  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ.” 
Whilst,  therefore,  Jesus  uniformly  speaks  of  con- 
scious fellowship  with  the  Father,  his  early  disciples 
speak  at  least  with  equal  frequency  of  communion 
with  the  Son  also.  They  are  as  conscious  of  imma- 
nence in  Him  as  of  immanence  in  the  Father.  They 
are  as  conscious  of  his,  as  of  the  Father’s  indwelling 
in  them.  This  peculiarity  of  their  consciousness 
reflects  itself  constantly  in  their  speech.  They  habit- 
ually speak  of  being  " in  Christ  Jesus,”  as  a charac- 
teristic of  all  believers.  At  the  same  time  they  are 
equally  wont  to  speak  of  Christ  in  them,  the  hope  of 
glory.  So  intimate  is  this  conscious  intercommunion 
of  life,  that  one  of  the  most  clear-headed  and  logical 
of  them  all,  seems  in  danger  at  times  of  almost  con- 
founding his  own  personality  with  Christ’s  : ” I am 
crucified  with  Christ;  nevertheless,  I live,  yet  not  I, 
but  Christ  liveth  in  me.”  Saluting  one  another,  these 
earliest  disciples  were  wont  to  recognize  and  asso- 


ITS  APOLOOETICAh  VALUE, 


75 


ciate  as  sources  of  all  spiritual  life  and  blessing  both 
invisible  participants  in  their  spiritual  communion. 
They  did  it  in  such  language  as  this.  ''Grace  be 
unto  you  and  peace  from  God  our  Father,  and  from 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,”  " Grace,  mercy,  and  peace 
from  God  the  Father  and  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.” 

But  have  we  yet  exhausted  the  contents  of  the 
apostolic  Christian  consciousness?  Was  it  simply 
and  solely  a consciousness  of  living  fellowship  with 
the  Father  and  with  Christ?  It  certainly  seems  not. 
Eeverting  once  more  to  Christ’s  promises  to  his  dis- 
ciples, we  certainly  find  that  he  pledged  them  another 
presence  more  explicitly  than  he  did  the  Father’s  or 
his  own.  He  calls  this  third  party  the  Paraclete,  the 
Spirit  of  truth.  He  cannot  n^ean  himself,  in  some 
etherialized  and  glorified  form,  for  he  clearly  distin- 
guishes this  new  party  as  " another  comforter,”  given 
in  answer  to  his  prayer,  and  to  take  his  place.  He 
says  of  him,  "He  shall  glorify  me.”  "He  shall 
receive  of  mine,  and  shall  show  it  unto  you.”  "He 
shall  testify  of  me.”  "He  shall  bring  all  things  to 
your  remembrance,  whatsoever  I have  said  unto  you.” 
Evidently  Jesus  cannot  have  been  thinking  and 
speaking  of  himself  in  some  posthumous  shape. 

Again,  it  is  hard  to  see  how  he  could  have  meant 
in  this  promise  any  prospective  form  of  the  Father’s 
manifestation.  He  distinguishes  this  comforter  as 
clearly  from  the  Father  as  from  himself.  Fie  says  : 
" The  Comforter,  which  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the 
Father  will  send  in  my  name,  he  shall  teach  you  all 
things,  and  bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance, 
whatsoever  I have  said  unto  you.”  Here  all  three 


76  THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 

are  mentioned  in  a way  which  natnrally  implies  the 
distinct  personality  of  each.  The  Comforter  is  rep- 
resented as  personal,  both  by  correlation  with  the 
other  two  personalities,  and  because  performing  the 
personal  office  or  work  of  teaching.  Yet  he  is 
distinguished  from  the  Father,  because  sent  by  him, 
and  from  Christ,  because  sent  in  his  name.  In 
other  statements,  our  Lord  repeatedly  discriminates 
between  the  Comforter  and  the  Father,  affirming  that 
the  former  " proceedeth  from  ” the  latter,  and  that 
the  latter  " gives  ” the  former.  Accordingly,  he  pre- 
scribes a formula  of  initiation  into  his  Church  for  all 
coming  ages,  in  which  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit 
find  each  coordinate  place  and  separate  mention. 
" Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.” 

Passing  now  from  the  Master’s  promise  to  the 
actual  religious  consciousness  mirrored  in  the  apos- 
tolic word,  we  find  mention  of  a " fellowship  of  the 
Spirit,”  just  as  we  before  found  mention  of  a fellow- 
ship with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ. 
We  find  the  same  idea  of  mutual  immanence.  The 
apostles  speak  as  if  consciously  in  the  Comforter,  and 
use  such  language  as  this  : " If  we  live  in  the  Spirit, 
let  us  also  walk  in  the  Spirit.”  Anon  they  speak  of 
the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  them  and  in 
their  fellow-believers.  Then  they  are  temples  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  This  reciprocal  indwelling  is  the 
real  badge  of  discipleship  : "Ye  are  not  in  the  flesh, 
but  in  the  Spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwell 
in  you.”  It  is  the  condition  and  characteristic  of 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE. 


77 


divine  Sonship  ; for  only  as  many  as  are  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  are  the  sons  of  God.  It  is  the  source 
of  all  filial  joy  and  free  utterance  toward  the  Father. 
If  any  soul  cries  out,  ''  Abba  Father,”  it  is  because 
being  a son,  God  hath  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his 
Son  into  such  soul,  enabling  it  thus  to  cry.  They 
speak  of  the  reception  of  this  Spirit  as  essential  to 
the  full  and  normal  Christian  experience  ; " Have  ye 
received  the  Holy  Ghost  since  ye  believed  ? ” They 
proffer  the  precious  gift  to  all  penitent  and  obedient 
souls ; "Eepent,  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you, 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.”  Their  intensely  personal  conception  of  this 
Spirit  betrays  itself  in  such  constantly  occurring 
expressions  as  these  : ” the  mind  of  the  Spirit  ” ; ''  the 
Spirit  itself  maketh  intercession  for  us  with  groan- 
ings  which  cannot  be  uttered  ” ; " the  Spirit  searcheth 
all  things  even  the  deep  things  of  God  ” ; all  these 
worketh  that  one  and  the  self-same  Spirit,  dividing 
to  every  man  severally  as  he  will.”  Yet,  in  their 
religious  consciousness,  this  intelligent,  sympathetic, 
groaning,  searching,  and  administering  Spirit  was  not 
identical  with,  but  a gift  of,  the  Father.  So  far, 
indeed,  is  he  from  being  the  Father  or  the  Son,  that 
we  find  access  to  the  Father  represented  as  possible 
to  men  only  by  this  Spirit,  and  through  the  Son. 
"Through  him  [Christ],  we  both  [i.  e,  Jews  and 
Gentiles]  have  access,  by  one  Spirit,  unto  the 
Father.” 

This,  and  similar  expressions,  are  striking  and 
noteworthy.  They  furnish  a clew  to  the  right  under- 


78 


THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 


standing  of  the  spiritual  communion  enjoyed  in  the 
apostolic  consciousness.  It  was  not  three  fellowships 
of  the  soul  with  three  other  beings  called  Father, 
Son  and  Holy  Ghost ; it  was  rather  one  fellowship, 
triply  mediated  on  the  divine  side.  In  the  Apostolic 
realization  of  it,  there  was  no  possibility  of  com- 
munion with  him,  whom  Jesus  had  taught  them  to 
call  the  Father,  save  through  the  Son,  and  in  or  by 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Christ’s  declaration  was  to  them 
most  true ; to  wit,  that  no  man  knoweth  the  Father 
save  the  Son,  and  he,  to  whomsoever  the  Son  shall 
reveal  him.  In  like  manner,  to  their  minds,  there 
can  be  no  right  recognition  of  the  Son  without  the 
Spirit ; for  on  the  one  hand,  ” No  man  speaking  by 
the  Spirit  of  Godcalleth  Jesus  accursed,”  and  on  the 
other,  " No  man  can  say  that  Jesus  is  the  Lord,  but 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.”  To  complete  the  circuit,  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  not  the  natural  possession  of  any  man, 
but  is  a gift  of  the  Father,  procured  by  the  Son. 
In  the  apostolic  religious  consciousness,  therefore, 
divine  communion  is  not  simple  and  immediate  ; with 
one  solitary  objective  personality,  it  is  rather  a com- 
plex and  mediated  one,  a participation  in  the  inter- 
communicated love,  grace,  and  fellowship  of  the 
Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost.  Hence  the  apostles 
sum  up  their  permanent  intercessory  aspiration  for 
the  Christian  brotherhood  most  completely  in  a tripar- 
tite formula,  exactly  parallel  to  Christ’s  baptismal 
one.  "The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  love 
of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost  be 
with  you  all.  Amen.” 

Such  a religious  consciousness  as  this  was  some- 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE. 


79 


tiling  wonderfully  strange  and  new.  It  presented  an 
astonishing  contrast  to  every  earlier  type  of  which 
mankind  had  knowledge.  Jt  is  not  remarkable, 
therefore,  that  we  find  the  disciples  giving  great 
prominence  to  the  newness  of  their  spiritual  experi- 
ence. Especially  do  we  find  them  contrasting  it 
with  the  two  types  of  religious  consciousness  best 
known  to  them : first,  the  earthward  and  selfward 
directed,  historically  expressed  in  surrounding  Gen- 
tilism ; and  second,  the  Godward  directed,  histori- 
cally expressed  in  genuine  Judaism.  By  nature, 
according  to  the  apostolic  representation,  we  all 
inherit  the  first  of  these  types.  By  nature,  Jew  and 
Gentile  are  children  of  wrath,  psychical  not  spiritual, 
alienated  from  the  life  of  God,  spiritually  dead.  All 
sin,  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God.  The  office 
of  the  Spirit  of  God  is  to  show  men  this.  The  first 
effect  of  his  agency,  so  far  as  the  consciousness  is 
concerned,  is  to  fill  the  soul  with  fear  and  grief,  and 
a terrible  sense  of  personal  sinfulness  and  just  divine 
displeasure.  Here,  there  is  divine  operation  in  the 
soul,  but  no  divine  fellowship.  This  comes  only 
when  the  thus  awakened  soul  repents  of  its  sins 
with  a godly  sorrow,  and  believes  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  Then,  being  justified  by  faith,  it  can  cry  out, 
” God,  who  is  rich  in  mercy,  for  his  great  love 
wherewith  he  hath  loved  us,  even  when  we  were 
dead  in  sins,  hath  quickened  us  together  with  Christ, 
and  raised  us  up  together  and  made  us  sit  together 
in  heavenly  places  in  Christ  Jesus.”  Here  is  instal- 
lation into  a conscious,  blessed  life-communion  with 
Christ.  The  old  state  was  death,  the  new  is  that  of 


80  THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 

perfect  resurrection  life.  Here,  with  Dante,  one  can 
turn  a fresh  leaf  in  life’s  book,  and  inscribe  upon  its 
centre,  in  the  reddest  of  letters, 

InCIPIT  nova  VITA. 

This  the  apostles  everywhere  assume  and  teach  to 
be  the  normal  and  usual  genesis  of  the  Christian  type 
of  religious  consciousness  in  the  case  of  all  hitherto 
heathen  and  positively  God-alienated  forms  of  that 
consciousness. 

But  there  was  another  type,  well  known  to  the 
early  disciples  of  Christ,  that  generated  under  the 
influence  of  Old  Testament  piety.  This  was  char- 
acterized, not  by  personal  hostility  to  God,  but 
by  reverence  for  his  holy  name  ; not  by  lawless  grati- 
fications of  natural  lust,  but  by  beautiful  exemplifica- 
tions of  all  continent  and  self-controlling  virtues ; 
not  by  selfishness,  but  by  self-sacrificing  obedience 
to  God.  Christ  appreciated  the  beauty  and  lofty 
excellence  of  the  genuine  Old  Testament  type  of 
religious  consciousness  ; he  had  its  noblest  exemplifi- 
cation before  his  very  eyes  in  the  person  of  his 
forerunner ; yet,  contrasting  the  inner  life  of  the 
incoming  dispensation  with  that  of  the  old,  he  de- 
clares, "Verily,  I.  say  unto  you,  Among  them  that  are 
born  of  women  there  hath  not  risen  a greater  than 
John  the  Baptist ; notwithstanding,  he  that  is  least 
in  the  kingdom  of  God  is  greater  than  he.”  This 
new  life  is  a new  wine,  requiring  new  bottles.  As  a 
new  life,  it  cannot  be  inaugurated,  even  in  devout 
souls,  without  affecting  their  religious  consciousness. 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE, 


81 


Its  obtainment  will  be  like  the  obtainment  of  a pearl 
of  great  price,  yea,  like  finding  life  after  considering 
it  lost.  The  grand  difference  between  the  genesis 
of  the  full  Christian  consciousness  in  such  souls,  and 
its  genesis  in  souls  of  the  natural  and  heathenish 
type  is,  that  in  the  former  case  it  comes  later  in  the 
religious  development.  The  crisis  which  fairly  and 
fully  inaugurates  the  new  consciousness  may  be  just 
as  marked  and  memorable,  but  it  is  not  associated  in 
their  minds  with  their  first  conscious  act  or  effort  to 
turn  from  sin  to  God.  It  is  rather  the  hour  when, 
by  a special  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  faithful 
servant  is  made  an  adopted  son,  when  the  Israelite, 
in  whom  there  is  no  guile,  becomes  transformed  into 
a flaming  apostle,  speaking  with  tongues,  and  wield- 
ing superhuman  powers.  Thus  was  it  in  the  experi- 
ence of  the  first  disciples  themselves.  Very  likely 
it  would  have  been  difllcult,  if  not  impossible,  for 
any  of  them  to  fix  the  exact  hour,  when,  according 
to  the  theological  phrase,  they  were  converted; 
nevertheless,  all  knew  the  precise  day,  and  hour  of 
the  day,  when  ''  suddenly  ” the  Pentecostal  fire  lit 
up  within  them  illuminations  which  were  never  more 
to  die.  Equal  definiteness  marked  the  experience 
of  the  three  thousand  who  shared  in  the  mighty 
baptism.  They,  too,  had  enjoyed  the  preparatory 
experience  of  Old  Testament  piety.  They  were  the 
faithful  Simeons  and  Annas  and  Elizabeths  of  three 
continents,  " devout  men,”  waiters  for  the  consola- 
tion of  Israel.  Many  of  them  were  doubtless  saints, 
according  to  their  light  and  privileges.  With  them, 
and  all  similar  converts,  in  the  weeks  and  months 


82 


THE  CimiSTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 


succeeding,  the  new  religious  consciousness  had  as 
clearly  marked  a commencement  as  in  the  case  of 
Gentile  converts,  yet  one  very  diJfferent  in  its  ante- 
cedents and  concomitants.  In  the  one  case  it  was  a 
sudden  transit  out  of  Pagan  ignorance  of  God  or 
conscious  enmity  against  God,  into  the  blessedness 
of  loving  communion  with  him;  in  the  other,  it  was 
the  inbreak  of  the  life  and  light  of  God  upon  a soul 
which  had  long  devoutly  sought  him.  The  subse- 
quent religious  consciousness  in  the  two  cases  was 
substantially  the  same.  It  was  a consciousness  of 
present  living  communion  with  the  Father,  Son  and 
Holy  Ghost.  So  oft  as  they  contrasted  it  with  their 
Christless  past,  it  caused  them  to  break  forth  with 
Paul,  " Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  hath  blessed  us  with  all  spiritual 
blessings  in  heavenly  places  in  Christ.”  Surveying 
a hostile  world,  they  declared,  by  its  inspiration, 
" Neither  death  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  principali- 
ties, nor  powers,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  height,  nor  .depth,  nor  any  other  creature, 
shall  be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God, 
which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.”  Even  at  the 
grave’s  mouth,  in  the  edge  of  the  shadows  and  dark- 
ness of  the  Hebrew  sheol^  this  consciousness  only 
voiced  itself  in  louder  peans  of  exultation,  " O 
Death  ! where  is  thy  sting  ? O grave  ! where  is  thy 
victory  ? ” 

Now,  had  this  type  of  religious  consciousness  for- 
ever disappeared  with  the  deceas^  of  those  earliest 
Christians,  what  a beautiful  thing  it  would  still  be 
for  men  to  contemplate  ! How  like  a perfect  ideal 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE. 


83 


would  it  stand  out  before  each  questioning,  strug- 
gling soul  I How  serious-minded  philosophers  would 
point  to  it,  and  say,  "Ah,  were  we  only  capable  of 
reproducing  those  experiences  and  that  conscious- 
ness, how  would  all  our  doubts  depart.  It  would 
then  be  ours  to  know  God^  and  in  that  knowledge, 
to  drown  forever  all  tormenting  fears  and  dubi- 
tations.^’ 

Thank  God ! the  supposition  is  inadmissible ! 
Thank  God  ! the  old  apostolic  type  of  religious  con- 
sciousness is,  in  every  essential  feature,  yet  extant. 
To-day,  as  eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  there  are 
men  who  know  God;  who  hold  conscious  com- 
munion with  him,  who,  through  Christ,  by  his  Spirit, 
have  access  to  the  Father.  The  fact  is  attested  by  a 
far  greater  number  of  competent  witnesses  than  ever 
attested  a transit  of  Venus,  or  the  existence  of  the 
Gulf  Stream.  Thousands  of  the  most  intelligent  and 
sober  men  and  women  in  the  world,  of  the  most 
diverse  denominational  attachments,  bear  witness, 
every  week,  to  the  occurrence  of  just  such  a transition 
in  their  religious  consciousness  as  that  which  ac- 
companied the  apostle’s  preaching.  They  say  that 
they  were  once  without  God,  and  without  hope  in 
the  world,  but  that  they  now  dwell  in  God,  and  God 
dwells  in  them.  Whereas,  they  once  were  blind  in 
all  spiritual  things,  now  they  see.  Once  they  hated 
God,  but  now  they  love  him.  Once  they  were  out 
of  Christ,  but  now  they  are  in  him.  They  feel  them- 
selves to  be  new  creatures,  and  old  things  are  passed 
away.  Behold  ! all  things  are  become  new. 

The  Christian  consciousness  of  these  men  attests 


84 


THE  CimiSTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 


its  genuineness,  not  only  by  producing  the  same 
supernatural  graces  of  character  which  adorned  the 
earliest  Christians,  but  also  by  manifesting  the  same 
self-propagative  power.  To-morrow  some  such  scene 
as  this  will  transpire  in  one  of  these  Boston  streets. 
One  of  these  men,  possessed  of  the  apostolic  Chris- 
tian consciousness,  will  accost  some  consciously 
wicked  man  with  the  question, ''  Friend,  are  you  a 
Christian?  ” ''No,”  will  be  the  reply,  " I cannot  say 

that  I am.”  Then  will  follow  an  affectionate  invita- 
tion to  the  wicked  man  to  repent  of  his  sins,  to  seek 
their  remission  through  the  blood  of  Christ,  to  ask  a 
new  heart  through  the  regenerating  power  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Two,  three,  four  weeks  hence,  you  will 
find  that  man,  whose  heart  and  lip  are  to-day  foul 
with  cursing,  praising  God,  hastening  from  friend  to 
friend  with  the  tidings  that  he  is  a changed  man, 
that  the  greatest  transformation  of  his  life  has  passed 
upon  and  within  him.  He  will  testify  that  he  is  now 
happy  in  God,  a Christian,  and,  as  such,  request  ad- 
mission to  the  Church  of  Christ.  Such  scenes  are 
constantly  transpiring  all  around  us.  Here  is  simply 
Apostolic  preaching,  with  the  old  Apostolic  result. 
In  this  instance,  the  genesis  of  the  new  religious 
consciousness  will  be  after  the  Gentile  Christian 
type. 

Step  into  yonder  " Holiness  meeting,”  where  the 
one  theme  is  the  Higher  Christian  Life,  so  called, 
and  you  shall  find  living  examples  of  a Christian 
consciousness  of  the  other  apostolic  variety,  one 
commencing,  not  in  conversion,  but  in  a Pentecost 
at  the  close  of  a long  Old  Testament  experience. 


ITS  APOLOGETICAL  VALUE, 


85 


There  you  shall  find  men  and  women,  saying,  "For 
ten,  twenty,  thirty  years,  I was  a professing  Chris- 
tian, but  a worshipper  in  the  outer  court.  All 
those  dreary  years  I tried  to  serve  God,  but  could 
never  feel  quite  sure  my  service  was  acceptable.  I 
hoped  in  God,  sometimes  believed  myself  Christ’s, 
but  could  never  come  to  the  blessed  assurance,  'My 
beloved  is  mine,  and  I am  his.’  The  joyful  confi- 
dence of  some  Christians  about  me,  even  of  some 
just  started  in  the  Christian  life,  staggered  me,  oh 
so  often  ! I said  within  myself,  ' It  cannot  be  that  I 
am  a Christian.’  I have  never  passed  through  this 
crisis  which  others  describe.  I never  have  been  able 
to  say  with  them,  I know  that  I am  passed  from 
death  unto  life,  or  that  the  Spirit  beareth  witness 
with  my  spirit  that  I am  a child  of  God.” 

Then  the  speaker  will  go  on  to  narrate  how,  from 
such  a doubting,  timorous  Old  Testament  servant  of 
God,  he  suddenly  became  a son;  how,  stimulated 
by  the  contrast  between  his  own  cold  and  comfortless 
condition,  and  the  deep,  strong,  and  blessed  con- 
sciousness of  divine  communion  enjoyed  by  some 
happier  believer,  he  was  led  to  study  God’s  idea  of 
normal  religious  life,  to  review  his  promises,  and 
how,  appropriating  those  promises  with  a fresh 
understanding  and  a quickened  faith,  on  such  a day, 
about  such  an  hour,  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
fell,  the  gift  of  power  came,  a beatific  vision  tranced 
the  soul  into  a sweet  sense  of  God’s  all-conquering 
and  everlasting  love.  Perhaps  he  will  say,  as  scores 
of  them  do  say,  that  the  experience  contradicted  all 
his  previous  conceptions,  all  his  life-long  beliefs. 


86  THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 

respecting  the  law  and  nature  of  religious  life.  Pos- 
sibly he  will  say,  " Twelve  months  ago  I should  have 
received  with  utter  incredulity  the  statement  that 
any  one  could  utter,  mentally  or  orally,  a doxology 
to  Jesus  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days  long, 
with  no  intermission  save  that  of  sleep,  and  that 
balmy  sleep  itself  would  often  fiee  from  the  presence 
of  a sweeter  delight,  the  luxury  of  praise.  I find 
my  mistake  in 'supposing  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  in 
its  higher  manifestations  intermittent  corrected.  The 
reverse  is  true.  It  is  intermittent  in  its  lower  mani- 
festations ; in  its  highest  it  is  constant.”  These, 
indeed,  are  the  ver}’"  words  of  one  of  these  witnesses, 
penned  but  a few  days  ago,  upon  the  first  anniver- 
sary of  the  beginning  of  his  higher  life.  The  writer 
is  a Christian  diviiie,  at  the  head  of  an  American 
college,  who,  during  the  twenty  years  of  public  life 
preceding  his  pentecostal  baptism,  was  distinguished 
for  nothing  so  much  as  for  constitutional  coolness  of 
temperament,  accuracy  of  Greek  scholarship,  and 
hatred  of  religious  pretense.  Just  such  reproduc- 
tions of  primitive  Christian  experience  of  the 
Jewish-Christian  tjrpe  of  origination  may  be  found 
in  many  branches  of  the  modern  Church,  in  every 
branch  where  Apostolic  Christianity  is  preached  • in 
all  its  fulness  of  privilege  and  promise. 

Undoubtedly,  a genuine  Christian  consciousness 
may  come  into  being,  in  modes  less  sudden  and 
revolutionary  than  either  of  the  two  just  mentioned ; 
but  what  I am  here  asserting  is  the  grand  fact,  that 
the  old  Apostolic  type  of  religious  consciousness  is 
not  extinct ; that  we  have  numberless  living  examples 


ITS  APOLOOETICAL  VALUE. 


87 


of  each  of  its  primitive  varieties.  In  thousands,  it 
may  be  faint  and  intermittent,  but  in  other  thousands 
it  exists  in  all  its  primitive  strength  and  vividness. 
A revelation  of  God  is  still  progressing  in  humanity. 
Christ  is  working  miracles  every  day  in  every  part 
of  Christendom.  The  Holy  Ghost  is  constantly 
repeating  Pentecost  in  many  an  upper  chamber. 
Within,  in  the  very  soul  of  the  Christian,  is  found 
the  crowning  evidence  of  Christianity.  Here  God 
himself  is  the  demonstrator,  and  his  demonstration 
is  the  demonstration  of  the  spirit  and  of  power. 

I spoke,  at  the  outset,  of  other  forms  of  religious 
consciousness,  atheistic,  polytheistic,  pantheistic, 
but  all  these  are  consciousnesses  of  belief,  not  of 
knowledge.  The  atheist  does  not  know  that  there 
is  no  God ; he  merely  thinks  so.  From  the  very 
nature  of  the  case,  he  cannot  know  or  prove  what  he 
asserts.  As  John  Foster  has  well  shown,  a man 
needs  to  be  God  in  order  to  know  there  is  none. 
"Unless  he  is  at  this  moment  in  every  place  in  the 
universe,  he  cannot  know  but  there  may  be  in  some 
place  manifestations  of  a Deity,  by  which  even  he 
would  be  overpowered.  If  he  does  not  know  abso- 
lutely every  agent  in  the  universe,  the  one  he  does 
not  know  may  be  God.”  Thus,  unless  he  is  omni- 
present and  omniscient,  that  is,  unless  he  precludes 
all  other  divine  existence  by  being  God  himself,  he 
cannot  know  that  the  being  whose  existence  he 
denies,  does  not  exist. 

In  like  manner,  in  the  polytheistic  consciousness, 
there  is  no  direct  and  immediate  knowledge  of  the 
gods  believed  in.  The  ancient  worshippers  of  Zeus 


88  TEE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 

and  Athene  and  Apollo  and  Artemis  and  Poseidon 
and  Aphrodite  never  dreamed  of  conscious  commun- 
ion with  these  divinities  in  their  own  souls.  They 
believed  in  the  existence  of  such  beings,  and  in  their 
traditional  mythological  powers  and  characteristics, 
but  they  were  not  conscious  of  personal  fellowship 
with  any  one  of  them.  They  viewed  them  as  objects 
of  worship,  but  not  as  objects  of  actual  knowledge. 
So  everywhere  and  always.  The  polytheist  believes, 
but  never  knows.  He  cannot  promise  to  men  of 
other  faiths,  not  even  to  the  sincerest  proselyte, 
certain  knowledge  that  his  gods  really  exist.  Only 
the  degraded  fetish-worshipper,  whose  god  is  a 
black  pebble  or  a crooked  stick  or  a grotesque 
lump  "of  rags  or  hair,  can  claim  a personal  knowledge 
of  the  true  object  of  worship. 

In  this  respect,  the  predicament  of  the  pantheist  is 
not  less  embarrassing  than  that  of  the  atheist.  He 
denies  the  existence  of  any  and  every  God  save  the 
unconscious  totality  of  all  real  being.  But  what 
does  he  know  about  it?  How  can  he  know,  first, 
that  all  real  being  is,  in  essence,  one?  Then,  how 
can  he  know  that  the  one  real  being  is  unconscious, 
impersonal  ? He  can  know  neither  of  these  things 
without  an  absolutely  complete  and  perfect  knowledge 
of  the  entire  universe  of  being.  If  he  knows  all 
beings  save  one,  that  one  may  be  the  God  of  Chris- 
tian Revelation.  If  he  knows  every  attribute  of 
universal  and  absolute  being,  save  one,  that  one  may 
be  conscious  personality.  Omniscience  is  essential 
to  a denial  of  omniscience.  The  simple  fact,  there- 
fore is,  and  remains,  that  the  pantheist  knows  noth- 


ITS  APOLOGETIOAL  VALUE, 


89 


ing  which  other  men  do  not  know ; ho  merely 
imngines,  believes,  dogmatises. 

Now,  the  signal  advantage  which  the  Christian  has 
ever  had  over  all  atheists,  polytheists,  pantheists,  and 
even  speculative  theists  is,  that  while  they  all  merely 
believe,  he  knows.  He  has  not  only  sought  God, 
but  found  him.  He  has  ascertained  that  there  is 
an  objective  reality,  answering  to  his  idea  of  God. 
Indeed,  his  present  idea  of  God  is  itself  a product 
of  that  reality,  just  as  his  idea  of  a given  friend  has 
come  from  the  objective  existence  and  bearing  of 
that  friend.  By  virtue  of  the  conscious,  divine  com- 
munion which  he  has  won,  he  has  a faith  which  stands 
not  in  the  wisdom  of  man,  but  in  the  power  of  God. 
No  fact  of  consciousness  can  ever  be  argued  down ; 
hence,  to  every  possessor  of  normal  Christian  con- 
sciousness, all  arguments  against  the  possibility  or 
fact  of  the  existence  of  a personal  God,  are  simply  the 
dogmatisings  of  ignorance  over  against  the  certainties 
of  personal  knowledge.  They  are  as  forceless  to 
him  as  are  the  old  mediaeval  arguments  against  the 
sphericity  of  the  earth,  to  one  who  has  himself  cir- 
cumnavigated it.  This  is  the  value  of  the  Christian 
consciousness  to  its  possessor  in  the  field  of  theistic 
and  anti-theistic  speculation. 

In  the  narrower  field  of  controversy,  where  theistic 
naturalism  and  supernaturalism  grapple,  the  facts  of 
a normal  Christian  consciousness  forever  settle  for  its 
possessor  every  speculative  doubt  and  difficulty.  Is 
it  suggested  that  the  Scripture  miracles  are  incredi- 
ble, the  Christian  is  not  disturbed.  He  says,  within 
himself,  ”In  my  own  consciousness,  I have  witnessed 


90 


THE  CHRIS TIAJSr  COJSTSCIOUSHESS  ; 


a miracle  greater  than  any  of  those,  a miracle  in- 
cluding all  of  them,  a miracle  which  was  at  once  an 
opening  of  blind  eyes,  an  unstopping  of  deaf  ears, 
a casting  out  of  devils,  a creative  production  of  bread 
and  wine,  a healing,  yea,  a resurrection  from  the 
dead.  There  can  be  no  greater  miracle  than  that 
which  God  has  wrought  in  me.” 

Is  it  alleged  that  an  incarnation  is  inconceivable  ; 
the  Christian  heart  says.  It  is  no  more  inconceivable 
that  God  should  become  a partaker  of  human  nature, 
than  that  man  should  become  a partaker  of  the  divine 
nature.  If  I can  become  a son  of  God,  God  can 
become  a son  of  man.  Ascent  is  harder  than  de- 
scent. If  man  can  achieve  a heavenly  birth,  God 
surely  can  an  earthly  one.  If  I can  become  inspirate, 
he  surely  can  become  incarnate.  My  partial  thean- 
thropic  life  legitimates,  yea,  necessitates,  the  supposi- 
tion of  a perfect  one.  That  perfect  one  is  Christ’s. 

In  just  this  way,  the  possessor  of  a normal  Chris- 
tian consciousness  meets  and  dissipates  every  specu- 
lative difficulty  which  deists,  of  all  schools,  urge 
against  the  great  facts  of  the  Christian  system,  such 
as  Supernatural  Revelation,  Inspiration,  human  Sin- 
fulness, Incarnation,  Atonement,  Miracles,  Super- 
natural Transformations  of  character.  His  own  new 
life  has  lifted  him  into  a sphere  where  all  these 
things  are  as  normal  and  natural  as  lullabies  and 
patriotic  celebrations  and  police  courts  and  social 
reforms  and  monument  building  are  in  the  sphere 
of  natural  human  society. 

He  sees  the  natural  and  the  supernatural  in  their 
true  relation.  In  his  own  personal  experience  both 


ITS  APOLOOETICAL  VALUE. 


91 


meet  and  blend.  He  sees  these  wise  philosophers 
of  the  natural  in  their  true  light ; sees  how  all  their 
difficulties  come,  not  from  knowledge,  but  from  igno- 
rance ; not  from  breadth,  but  from  narrowness ; not 
from  a point  of  vision  above  the  Christian,  but  one 
below  it.  He  pities  them,  but  cannot  share  their 
intellectual  perplexities.  He  is  as  far  beyond  all 
such  perplexities  as  the  grown  man  is  beyond  the 
speculative  difficulties  of  his  embryonic  period  touch- 
ing possibilities  of  birth. 

But  the  Christian  consciousness  has  apologetic 
value  beyond  its  own  subjects.  It  surpasses  all 
reasonings  in  bringing  pagans  and  unbelievers  to 
an  acceptance  of  the  Christian  faith. 

The  man  who  knows  God  will  always  impress  men 
who  know  him  not.  If  they  are  sincere  seekers  after 
the  truth,  they  will  eagerly  confess  their  own  dark- 
ness and  ignorance,  and  desire  to  share  his  light. 
Even  if  averse  to  truth  and  righteousness,  they  will 
be  affected,  despite  themselves,  by  the  marked  con- 
trast between  his  peace  and  calm  and  blessedness  of 
soul,  and  their  own  unrest  and  gloom  and  apprehen- 
sion. They  will  inevitably  covet  his  manifest  supe- 
riority to  the  circumstances  which  make  their  life  a 
bitterness  and  mockery.  Witnessing  his  triumphal 
departure  out  of  this  world,  they  will  cry  out,  with 
the  ancient  ethnic  prophet  of  the  East,  "Let  me 
die  the  death  of  the  righteous,  and  let  my  last  end 
be  like  his.” 

The  proudest,  keenest,  most  subtile  and  erudite 
skepticism  of  the  ages  is  not  proof  against  this  silent 
influence  of  Christian  character.  A former  disciple 


92  THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS; 

of  Strauss  and  Feuerbach  and  Baur  and  Schwegler, 
thus  tells  the  story  of  his  recovery  to  the  Christian 
faith : ” What  particularly  aided  me^  was  the  idea, 
or  rather  the  reality,  of  regeneration.  I saw  before 
me  men  whom  I was  compelled  to  recognize  as 
regenerate  men.  From  childhood,  I had  seen  such. 
An  inmost  voice  told  me  that  I too  must  be  born 
again.  But  if  so,  then  there  must  be  a superhuman 
being  of  whom  men  can  be  born  again,  a living  God. 
And  more : what  regeneration  is  to  the  individual, 
that  is  Christ  to  total  humanity,  the  living  principles 
of  the  transformation  of  flesh  into  spirit.  And  thus, 
starting  from  the  inmost  centre  of  my  own  life,  I 
was  led  back  to  the  supermundane  God  and  to  the 
historical  Christ,  the  crucified  and  ascended.” 

The  man  thus  recovered  from  the  negations  of 
Tubingen  has  given  a life-time  to  the  defence  and 
propagation  of  Christian  principles,  and  become,  in 
his  generation,  a most  honored  and  successful  de- 
fender of  the  faith.  His  experience  is  but  one  of  a 
thousand  similar  ones,  where  radical  and  confirmed 
infidelity  has  yielded  before  the  silent,  unobtrusive 
influence  of  simple  Christian  living. 

But  these  indirect  and  unintentional  efiects  of  the 
Christian  consciousness  are  only  the  least.  The 
Christian,  of  normal  experience,  is  of  necessity  an 
irrepressible  propagandist.  He  cannot  hold  his 
peace.  He  has  found  the  panacea  for  all  human 
misery ; the  gate  from  death  and  darkness  to  im- 
mortal life ; the  spell  which  transmutes  children  of 

* Carl  August  Auberlen,  author  of  Die  Gottliche  Offenbarung,  and 
other  works. 


ITS  APOLOGETIC AL  VALUE, 


93 


the  devil  into  children  of  the  Highest.  Of  the 
mere  believer  in  the  Evangelical  system,  Starr  King 
affirmed,  "He  must  be  either  a maniac  or  a mission- 
ary.” What  statement,  then,  can  be  strong  enough 
to  even  hint  the  aggressive  impulse  of  the  man  who 
has  passed  from  the  standpoint  of  mere  belief  to  that 
of  personal  spiritual  experience  ? His  conscious 
union  with  an  almighty  Saviour  lifts  him  above  all 
fear,  all  hesitancy,  all  calculation  of  consequences. 
In  dungeons  and  stocks,  and  racks  and  martyr-fires, 
he  shouts  aloud  for  joy,  and  dies  with  songs  of 
victory. 

Such  enthusiasm  is  infectious.  The  half-faith  of 
false  religions  fall  before  it ; the  coldness  of  false 
philosophy  is  melted ; the  hardness  of  sin-bound 
hearts  vanishes  away.  One  chases  a thousand,  and 
two  put  ten  thousand  to  flight.  Here  is  the  philos- 
ophy of  Christian  aggression,  the  secret  of  all  past 
Christian  conquests.  If  ever  the  yet  remaining 
heathen  are  to  be  reached,  and  Christianity  become 
the  world’s  religion,  it  will  not  be  by  argument,  or 
by  speculation,  or  any  kind  of  guess-work,  but  by 
the  old  gospel  process  of  bringing  men  to  God 
through  Christ,  and  so  instating  within  them  the 
Christian  consciousness. 

The  guarantee  of  Christianity’s  perpetuity,  then, 
is  found  in  her  own  supernatural  life.  The  great 
Defender  of  the  Faith  is  God.  As  long  as  he 
answers  prayer  offered  in  the  name  of  Jesus;  as 
long  as,  through  Christ,  he  inducts  men  into  con- 
scious communioq  with  himself,  so  long  will  men 
believe  in  Christianity.  As  long  as  men  show  the 


94 


THE  CHRISTIAN  CONSCIOUSNESS. 


possession  of  the  normal  Christian  consciousness,  so 
long  will  other  men  yearn  to  possess  it  also.  On 
the  other  hand,  were  this  perpetual  divine  vindica- 
tion of  the  system  to  cease,  not  all  the  arguments  of 
all  the  libraries  of  Christian  apology  could  keep  the 
faith  alive  a single  generation. 

All  history  but  repeats  the  scene  enacted  seven 
and  twenty  centuries  ago,  upon  a sea  overlooking  the 
hill-top  of  Northern  Palestine.  As  there  and  then,  so 
through  the  age-long  life  of  man,  false  altars  and 
false  priests  have  stood  confronting  and  opposing 
God’s.  As  there  and  then,  however,  so  always  and 
everywhere,  observant  humanity  has  watched  and 
waited  for  the  God  " that  answereth  by  fire.”  And 
whensoever  on  inner  or  on  outer  altar,  at  the  prayer 
of  any  true  prophet,  the  fire  has  fallen,  even  the 
onlooking  world  have  lifted  multitudinous  voices 
with  the  awed  yet  glad  confession : " The  Lord 

He  is  God,  the  Lord  He  is  God.” 


IV. 


MORAL  LAW  AS  REVELATION. 

Men  are  naturally  both  religious  and  ethical. 

They  need  truth  in  reference  to  God  and  in 
reference  to  duty ; and  under  the  impulse  of  their 
own  nature  and  the  general  movement  of  Divine 
Providence,  they  will  feel  after  God,  and  inquire  for 
duty  and  right.  Such  truth  is  seen  or  felt  to  be  a 
condition  of  satisfaction  and  happiness,  as  food  and 
clothing  are  essential  to  physical  comfort  and  well- 
being. This  want  might  not  be  distinctly  recognized 
in  the  consciousness  of  every  man,  or  there  might  be 
no  distinct  apprehension  of  the  occasion  of  the 
uneasiness  or  the  unrest-,  which  is  the  instinctive 
outreaching  of  the  soul  for  substantial  truth  and 
good ; yet,  here  and  there,  in  almost  every  com- 
munity and  people,  this  want  finds  an  utterance. 
Some  soul,  moved  by  a deeper  experience  than  that 
of  others,  has  felt  and  expressed  the  want,  and  the 
rest  have  responded.  The  utterance  is  the  interpre- 
tation of  their  own  experience  which  they  had  failed 
to  analyze.  It  is  indeed  conceivable,  that  a tribe  or 
people  may  be  so  depressed  in  their  life,  so  occupied 
with  the  meaner  wants  of  their  nature,  as  never  to 
have  recognized  this  spiritual  want,  established  forms 

. 95 


96 


MORAL  LAW 


of  religion,  or  settled  any  principles  of  morality. 
But  such  a fact  is  exceptional,  if  it  exists  at  all. 
The  general  result  in  human  experience  is,  that 
there  is  a struggle  after  objects  of  religious  faith, 
and  a standard  of  character,  and  some  attainment  in 
both  directions. 

There  is  no  room  to  doubt,  that  some  knowledge, 
both  of  religion  and  morality,  is  naturally  attainable 
by  men.  Paul  spoke  to  the  Athenians  of  the  encour- 
agement to  seek  the  Lord,  to  feel  after  him,  and 
fiyid  him ; and  again,  speaking  of  the  light  pertaining 
to  God,  which  is  afforded  to  all  men,  he  says : "For 
the  invisible  things  of  him,  from  the  creation  of  the 
world,  are  clearly  seen,  being  understood  by  the 
things  which  are  made,  so  that  they  are  without 
excuse  ” ; and  the  corrupt  ideas  of  God,  which  men 
have  cherished,  he  attributes  to  the  dishonesty  of 
their  own  hearts, — their  unwillingness  to  practise 
the  truth  they  know.  This  view  is  sustained  by  the 
facts  of  human  experience.  In  all  ages  and  among 
all  people,  some  real  knowledge  of  God  has  found 
lodgment  in  the  most  earnest  souls,  and  has  been 
imparted  by  them  to  others ; and  since  the  human 
soul  is  naturally  adapted  to  the  recognition  and 
acceptance  of  God,  as  the  child  is  constituted  to 
know  and  accept  the  parent,  the  wonder  is,  that  the 
darkness  of  the  world  has  been  so  dense,  the  light 
so  feeble  and  uncertain.  When  Socrates  presented 
a few  clear  and  simple  thoughts  to  the  Athenians,  in 
reference  to  God’s  being  and  providence,  instead  of 
embracing  him  as  a teacher  and  prophet,  bringing 
the  truth  which  their  souls  thirsted  for,  they  put 


REVELATION. 


97 


him  to  death  for  introducing  strange  divinities  into 
tlie  state.  Paul’s  experience  among  the  same  people, 
five  hundred  years  later,  was  less  tragic,  but  scarcely 
more  encouraging.  His  judgment  in  reference  to 
the  unbelieving  world  was  that  ” they  did  not  like 
to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge.” 

The  latest  results  of  researches  into  the  religious 
history  of  man  would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  move- 
ment, among  the  vast  masses  of  mankind,  has  been 
from  light,  more  or  less  distinct,  to  darkness,  in  ref- 
erence to  the  being  and  nature  of  God ; that  far 
back  in  the  history  of  the  principal  races,  one  God 
was  known  and  worshipped, — a personal  being,  of 
infinite  excellence,  creator  and  ruler  of  men;  and 
that  this  original  monotheistic  view  gradually  gave 
place  to  polytheism,  pantheism,  or  atheism. 

The  oldest  records  of  the  Chinese  recognize  a 
personal  God, — a supreme  intelligence  to  whom  all 
things  are  known,  who  approves  of  righteousness 
and  hates  iniquity.  This  pure  conception  lapsed 
finally  into  a philosophical  abstraction,  which  repre- 
sents the  primal  principle  as  absolute  emptiness.  Con- 
fucianism, which  has  ruled  the  Chinese  thought  for 
twenty-three  hundred  years,  drops  out  all  thought  of 
God,  and  proposes  Ancestors  as  the  proper  object  of  the 
natural  instinct  of  reverence  and  worship.  The  result 
is,  that  Confucius  himself,  as  the  most  distinguished 
among  these  Ancestors,  has  many  hundred  temples 
erected  to  his  name,  one  of  them  covering  ten  acres  of 
ground  ; and  at  the  semi-annual  festivals,  seventy  thou- 
sand animals  are  offered  to  his  memory,  and  twenty- 
seven  thousand  pieces  of  silk  are  burned  on  his  altars. 


98 


MORAL  LAW 


The  course  of  religious  thought  among  the  Hindoos 
has  been  much  the  same.  Their  oldest  Vedas  speak 
of  a supreme  Spirit,  ” who,  through  his  power,  is  the 
only  King  of  the  breathing  and  awakening  world, 
who  governs  all,  both  man  and  beast.’’  This  mono- 
theistic view  degenerates  at  length  into  Brahminism, 
an  empty  and  aimless  pantheism;  and  this  again, 
by  a reaction,  into  Buddhism,  which  knows  no  God 
but  the  Buddha,  a deified  man;  and  the  grossest 
idolatry  is  the  result  of  all. 

In  Persia,  religious  thought,  under  the  hand  of 
Zoroaster,  took  the  form  of  Dualism,  involving  the 
existence  and  conflict  of  two  powers,  of  Good  and 
Evil.  Yet,  there  are  traces  of  a Monotheism  still  back 
of  this,  which  finally  yielded  to  the  worship  of  the 
host  of  heaven  and  to  the  fire-worship  of  later  times. 

The  Egyptians  worshipped  a multitude  of  gods  as 
far  back  as  their  distinctive  religion  can  be  traced ; 
and  yet  there  are  indications  that  this  gross  and  all- 
pervading  polytheism  was  a reaction  from  Asiatic 
pantheism ; and  this,  again,  a derivation  from  an' 
older  Monotheism  which  characterized  the  original 
people  of  Central  Asia. 

The  Greeks  and  Komans,  springing  from  the  same 
Asiatic  centre,  left  behind  them  the  spiritual  con- 
ception of  the  Deity,  and  multiplied  their  gods,  to 
correspond  with  the  forces  of  nature  and  with  the 
objects  of  interest  in  personal,  in  social,  and  in  civil 
life,  giving  them  characters  answering  to  their 
own, — stern  and  grave  and  virtuous,  or  trifling  and 
gay  and  wanton,  according  to  their  own  inclinations ; 
all  this,  too,  in  connection  with  such  attainments  in 


AS  REVELATION. 


99 


philosophy,  in  literature,  and  in  art,  as  have  made 
them  the  admiration  of  all  the  later  nations.  Their 
philosophy,  indeed,  carried  along,  side  by  side  with 
this  polytheism,  lofty  ideas  of  God  as  a personal  and 
spiritual  being.  Socrates  and  Plato  and  Aristotle 
brought  back  the  true  thought  of  God ; but  it  was 
never  accepted  in  the  life  of  the  people,  and  the 
philosophy  itself  at  length  degenerated  into  the  pan- 
theism of  the  Stoics  and  the  practical  atheism  of  the 
Epicureans.  These  great  facts  in  human  experience 
show  what  we  may  expect  from  the  instincts  of 
human  nature,  however  elevated  they  may  be,  and 
correspond  with  the  declarations  of  Paul  in  reference 
to  the  course  of  men  as  to  the  knowledge  of  God : 
” Because,  that  when  they  knew  God,  they  glorified 
him  not  as  God,  neither  were  thankful,  but  became 
vain  in  their  imaginations  and  their  foolish  heart  was 
darkened ; ” " Who  changed  the  truth  of  God  into  a 
lie,  and  worshipped  and  served  the  creature  more 
than  the  Creator,  who  is  blessed  forever.” 

All  this  does  not  prove  that  the  human  soul  has 
not,  in  its  nature,  a reaching  after  God  the  Creator, 
the  infinite  Father,  in  whom  we  live  and  move  and 
have  our  being,  and  that  men  do  not  recognize  his 
claims  when  he  lays  his  commands  upon  them.  All 
these  vain  imaginings  must  fly,  at  God’s  personal 
approach,  as  shadows  of  the  night,  when  the  morning 
comes.  They  are  only  such  stuflT  as  dreams  are 
made  of.  But  these  facts  do  indicate  that  God  must 
come  down  to  men,  and  that  men  will  not  rise  to 
God.  Their  religious  nature  does  not  guide  them 
to  the  truth. 


100 


MORAL  LAW 


The  leading  principles  of  morals  would  seem  to  be 
more  fully  within  the  reach  of  men,  in  their  natural 
experience,  than  the  great  facts  of  God’s  being  and 
government.  These  principles  are  strictly  rational, 
apprehended  by  the  human  intelligence  as  truly  as 
the  axioms  of  mathematics.  God  and  our  neighbor 
being  known,  the  obligation  to  respect  their  being 
and  regard  their  welfare  cannot  be  unknown.  Every 
human  being  must  know  that  he  ought  to  love  God 
and  his  fellow-men.  He  may  not  be  able  to  put  his 
thought  into  that  exact  form,  but  in  a thousand  ways 
he  shows  that  he  understands  the  duty.  This  knowl- 
edge of  the  great  principle  of  right  and  wrong  is 
brought  out  in  all  human  experience. 

In  particular  cases  and  questions  of  duty,  men 
differ,  because  judgments  differ  in  reference  to  the 
bearing  and  tendency  of  particular  courses  of  action. 
Not  only  do  the  enlightened  and  the  thoughtful  dis- 
sent from  the  unenlightened,  but  the  best-informed 
and  most  conscientious,  from  each  other.  This  va- 
riance, however,  is  not  in  reference  to  the  great 
principle  of  duty,  — the  obligation  to  regard  God 
and  man,  — but  with  respect  to  what  that  regard 
requires  in  the  particular  case.  The  Mohammedan 
and  the  Jew  alike  agree  that  God’s  commandments 
must  be  obeyed.  The  Jew  recognizes  the  duty  to 
observe  as  sacred  the  seventh  day  of  the  week. 
The  Mahommedan  knows  no  such  command,  and 
does  not  recognize  the  duty.  Either  following  hon- 
estly his  own  light,  would  meet  the  divine  will. 
One  Christian  accepts  the  command,  " Eepent,  and 
be  baptized,”  as  requiring  the  observance  of  an  out- 


.IS  REVELATION. 


101 


ward  ordinance.  Another  accepts  the  command  as 
referring  only  to  an  inward  and  spiritual  cleansing ; 
hut  both  alike  maintain  the  duty  of  implicit  obedience 
to  God,  and  each  is  accepted  according  to  that  he 
hath.  One  philanthropist  holds  that  human  life  is 
too  sacred  a thing  to  sacrifice,  even  for  the  main- 
tenance of  law.  Another  holds  that  human  life  is  so 
sacred  as  to  call  for  every  safeguard,  and  to  warrant 
the  infliction  even  of  capital  punishment  for  its  pro- 
tection. Neither  ever  questions  the  great  duty  of 
love  to  man.  All  such  differences  are  in  entire  har- 
mony with  the  acceptance  of  the  same  fundamental 
rule  of  righteousness, — a practical  knowledge  of  the 
great  principles  of  ethics. 

A full  and  satisfactory  expression  of  those  prin- 
ciples is  entirely  a different  thing.  The  knowledge 
comes  by  intuition ; the  expression,  by  reflection 
and  discrimination.  An  elementary  knowledge  of 
duty,  and  a knowledge  of  the  philosophy  of  duty, 
are  different  things,  yet  both  are  within  the  reach 
of  the  human  understanding.  Everywhere  upon 
the  face  of  the  earth  we  find  that  men  not  only 
know  essential  duty,  and  hold  themselves  and  others 
responsible  for  right  conduct,  but  they  have  more 
or  less  complete  expressions  of  that  law  of  right- 
eousness. Certainly  it  should  not  surprise  us  to 
find  such  expressions  coming  from  the  philoso- 
phers, the  thinkers  among  men  in  every  land  and 
in  every  age.  When  Confucius  gives  us  something 
like  the  golden  rule  of  our  Saviour,  it  is  only 
what  we  might  expect.  That  rule  commends  itself 
to  the  human  understanding,  and  it  is  only  natural 


102 


MORAL  LAW 


that  the  human  mind,  struggling  for  an  expression 
of  our  intuitive  knowledge  of  duty,  should  sometime 
attain  that  beautiful  utterance.  All  men  have  some 
sense  of  the  beauty  of  goodness  and  some  aspiration 
for  it ; and  it  is  only  human,  that  this  aspiration 
should  now  and  then  find  expression  in  a prayer  like 
that  of  Zoroaster : " I desire,  by  my  prayer,  with 
uplifted  hands,  this  joy, — the  pure  works  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  a disposition  to  perform  good  actions, 
and  pure  gifts  for  both  worlds,  the  bodily  and  the 
spiritual.” 

The  great  want  of  men  has  never  been  a knowl- 
edge of  what  ought  to  be  done,  but  a heart  to  do 
what  they  know.  There  are  none  so  dark  in  their 
understanding  of  duty  that  they  could  not  do  nobly 
if  they  would.  This  was  Paul’s  infirmity.  "I  de- 
light in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man,  but 
when  I'  would  do  good,  evil  is  present  with  me.” 
This  is  the  weakness  of  human  nature.  If,  then,  God 
should  give  to  men  a system  of  ethics,  a revelation 
of  right  and  duty,  we  might  anticipate  special  pro- 
vision for  this  human  weakness, — such  adaptations 
in  the  form  of  the  law  and  in  the  conditions  of  its 
presentation  as  should  furnish  the  motives  to  obe- 
dience which  all  men  need.  The  world  is  suffering 
not  so  much  for  light  as  for  love, — a disposition  to 
welcome  the  light  and  walk  in  it.  In  the  darkest 
portion  of  the  world,  the  darkness  is  not  so  great 
that  he  who  comes  to  the  work  with  an  honest  and 
earnest  heart,  would  not  find  the  path  of  essential 
duty  open  to  him.  Indeed,  the  maintenance  of  that 
honest  and  earnest  and  truth-loving  heart  is  the  per- 


AS  REVELATION, 


103 


formance  of  essential  duty.  It  is  the  faith,  without 
which  it  is  impossible  to  please  God ; it  is  the  love 
which  fulfils  the  law.  But  here  lies  the  grand  diffi- 
culty,— how  to  persuade  these  dark-souled  men  to 
undertake  this  honest  and  truth-loving  life.  By  this 
test  is  revealed  the  weakness  of  the  philosophies,  the 
moral  systems,  and  the  religions  of  the  world  in 
general.  Our  present  inquiry  is,  whether  the  ethical 
system  of  the  Christian  Scriptures  meets  those  human 
wants,  in  such  a manner  and  to  such  a degree  as  to 
indicate  an  origin  other  than  human?  Have  we  in 
the  Bible  the  law  of  God  as  distinguished  from  the 
results  of  mere  human  thought  ? 

In  this  inquiry  we  assume  that  the  Old  and  the  New 
.Testament  present  one  and  the  same  ethical  system. 
Such  is  their  claim  and  such  is  the  fact.  The  Saviour, 
in  his  clearest  utterances  of  the  law  of  duty,  claims 
to  add  nothing  to  the  substance  of  that  law  as 
given  by  Moses  and  the  prophets.  He  distinctly 
announces  that  his  two  commandments  are  only  the 
summary  of  the  older  law,  and  even  the  very  words 
of  the  first  and  great  commandment,  and  of  the 
second,  which  is  like  unto  it,  are  given  in  the  books 
of  Moses,  Deut.  6:5.  ” Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord 

the  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul, 
and  with  all  thy  might.” — ^Lev.  19  :18.  ” Thou  shalt 

love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.”  That  there  should  be 
in  the  later  Scriptures  new  applications  of  the  law, 
is  a necessity  of  progress  in  knowledge  and  experi- 
ence among  men.  Such  new  applications  we  are 
still  making,  and  must  continue  to  make,  as  our  range 
of  thought  extends  and  new  lines  of  action  open, 


104 


MORAL  LAW 


but  the  law  is  forever  the  same.  Nothing  can  be 
added  or  taken  away. 

Let  us  contemplate  this  law  in  two  particulars, — 
its  matter  or  content,  and  the  manner  of  its  pfesenta^ 
tion : and  in  the  light  of  these,  inquire  what  are  the 
indications  as  to  its  origin?  Is  it  the  product  of 
human  thought  in  its  natural  movements,  or  was  it 
Divinely  given?  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  suggest, 
that  while  this  question  is  one  of  grave  importance, 
it  is  not  fundamental  in  the  sense  that  it  involves  the 
validity  or  binding  force  of  the  law.  If  this  law  car- 
ries with  it  evidence  that  it  is  according  to  truth, 
then  it  must  stand  and  be  accepted,  whatever  the 
source  from  which  we  obtain  it.  But  if  it  comes 
from  God,  then  it  is  the  law  of  God,  and  there  are 
new  and  stronger  motives  to  obedience. 

In  its  matter^  the  law  enjoins  the  respect  which  is 
due  to  God  and  the  respect  which  is  due  to  man. 
It  contemplates  God  as  having  interests  and  rights 
which  his  creatures  are  to  regard.  He  occupies  the 
place  of  a ruler  and  a father,  and  all  the  interests 
and  rights  of  a ruler  and  a father  pertain  to  him. 
His  honor  is  valuable  to  himself,  and  important  to 
the  world.  Hence,  his  creatures  must  render  him 
the  honor  which  is  rightly  his.  To  put  another  in 
his  place,  is  a wrong  to  him,  a trespass  upon  his 
interests  and  his  rights,  as  well  as  an  offence  against 
his  government, — a weakening  of  his  authority  with 
his  creatures.  On  his  own  account,  and  for  his  own 
sake,  we  are  to  render  him  our  reverence  and  our 
loyal. obedience,  because  such  a tribute  is  a good  to 
him,  an  element  in  his  blessedness.  As  a father, 


AS  ItEVELATION. 


105 


he  needs  the  love  and  confidence  of  his  children. 
Such  filial  regard  is  a good  to  him.  He  asks  it  on 
his  own-  account,  as  a human  father  seeks  the  love 
and  confidence  of  his  children.  It  is  not  simply  that 
men  may  be  blessed  in  rendering  it,  but  that  he 
himself  may  have  the  infinite  satisfaction  and  bless- 
edness of  I’eceiving.  The^rs^  and  great  command- 
ment is.  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with 
all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
might,  because  God’s  enjoyment  of  the  love  of  his 
creatures  is  the  highest  coneeivable  good.  The  law 
directs  our  thought  first  to  God,  and  places  him  first 
and  foremost,  because  he  is  first  and  greatest  and 
best ; not  because  he  is  in  the  place  of  power,  and 
can  require  such  regard,  but  because  he  is  first  by 
the  infinite  excellence  and  greatness  of  his  being. 
Hence  the  demand  is  reasonable  and  just, — the  only 
proper  expression  of  duty. 

It  is  unquestionably  true,  that  such  honor  and  love 
to  God  are  the  prime  condition  of  the  well-being 
of  the  creatures  of  God,  and  it  is  conceivable  that 
the  duty  might  be  enjoined  on  this  ground.  But  love 
to  God  is  the  condition  of  good  to  men,  because  it  is 
in  itself  so  reasonable  and  just.  If  there  were  no 
natural  ground  for  the  duty  to  God  on  his  own 
account,  it  never  could  be  made  the  essential  condi- 
tion of  our  well-being.  The  law  is  not,  place  God 
first  and  foremost  in  love  and  honor  because  thus 
only  canst  thou  be  blest ; but  love  and  honor  him 
because  this  is  his  right  and  his  due. 

In  all  these  declarations  and  requirements  of  duty 
to  God,  there  is  no  carefulness  to  guard  against  the 


106 


MORAL  LAW 


idea  that  he  needs  our  love  and  delights  in  it  with 
infinite  delight, — no  intimation  that  while  it  is  our 
duty  to  render  this  regard,  he  is  so  exalted  in  his 
nature  that  our  grateful  love  cannot  reach  him.  On 
the  contrary,  we  are  led  on  to  the  conviction  that  in 
the  depth  of  the  riches  of  his  being  there  is  complete 
appreciation  of  the  tribute  which  his  humblest  crea- 
ture brings,  and  a want  when  that  tribute  is  with- 
held. To  fail  in  this  duty  is  a wrong  done  first  to 
God,  and  next  to  our  own  souls.  The  first  and  great 
commandment  has  an  everlasting  basis  in  the  natxire 
of  God,  and  is  sustained  and  enforced  by  the  reason 
of  man. 

But  other  beings  have  their  interests,  their  rights 
and  claims.  It  would  be  human  to  stop  with  the 
enunciation  of  this  first  and  great  commandment. 
God  is  so  great,  and  his  rights  and  claims  so  clearly 
paramount,  that  all  other  beings  may  be  forgotten. 
If  God  be  honored,  all  is  well ; nothing  further  can 
be  required.  Thus  human  wisdom  has  often  rea- 
soned. Not  so,  the  law  as  given  to  Israel.  By  the 
side  of  this  great  commandment,  there  stands  the 
second,  like  unto  it,  namely  this : " Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself.”  LiTce  unto  it,  because  it 
rests  on  the  same  foundation  of  natural  interests  and 
rights.  Our  neighbor’s  well-being  is  a good  which 
has  its  claims  upon  our  regard, — a good  as  valuable 
as  our  own.  Hence  we  are  to  give  him  his  place  by 
our  side  on  the  common  platform  of  humanity.  He 
may  be  a stranger,  or  even  an  enemy ; the  obligation 
stands  in  all  its  force,  and  these  extreme  cases  are 
presented  as  a test  of  the  genuineness  of  neighborly 


AS  REVELATION. 


107 


love.  " Love  ye  tlie  stranger,  for  ye  were  strangers 
in  the  land  of  Egypt.”  Our  neighbor  is  a brother 
man ; not  one  who  is  agreeable  to  us  by  his  char- 
acter, or  dear  to  us  by  natural  ties,  but  one  who 
shares  our  humanity,  — this  breathing,  sentient  na- 
ture, with  its  capacities  and  its  wants.  His  interests 
and  rights  are  commended  to  our  regard  on  account 
of  their  own  value,  and  for  his  sake, — not  because 
Ave  bless  ourselves  in  the  performance  of  this  neigh- 
borly duty,  or  find  our  own  happiness  in  giving  to 
others  their  place.  Such  a result  will  unquestionably 
follow;  he  that  loseth  his  life,  shall  keep  it  ever- 
more ; but  it  is  not  losing  one’s  life  to  place  it  ever 
foremost  in  the  service  rendered  to  others.  The  law 
is  not,  love  thyself  by  loving  thy  neighbor,  but  love 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself.  He  has  his  rights,  as  we 
have  ours,  and  we  are  to  give  them  place.  On  the 
same  ground  upon  which  honor  is  due  to  God,  rests 
our  duty  to  man,  and  God  places  himself  side  by 
side  with  man  in  the  presentation  of  his  claims. 

Again,  the  second  commandment  is  like  the  first, 
because  the  same  state  of  heart  fulfils  them  both. 
The  just  and  honest  heart  render  both  to  God  and 
to  man  their  dues,  and  one  of  these  commandments 
cannot  be  fulfilled  without  fulfilling  the  other.  Love 
to  God  is  even  tested  by  the  fact  of  love  to  man ; 
"He  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom  he  hath  seen, 
how  can  he  love  God  whom  he  hath  not  seen?” 
The  love  to  God  which  passes  by  man,  is  a counter- 
feit and  a delusion,  and  the  love  to  man  which  for- 
gets God,  is  equally  so.  This  is  divine  wisdom  and 
insight, — luminous  to  the  human  intelligence,  when 


108 


MOItAL  LAW 


once  presented ; but  when  did  mere  human  wisdom 
ever  attain  it?  Brahminism  has  stumbled  on  one 
side,  giving  us  a piety  as  empty  and  soulless  as 
space  ; and  Buddhism  and  Confucianism  on  the  other, 
presenting  a powerless  and  lifeless  morality.  The 
Divine  Law  solves  the  problem,  making  genuine 
piety  and  morality  one  and  the  same  thing.  Each 
involves  the  other. 

Let  us  remember,  too,  that  obedienee  to  this  law 
is  a spiritual  service.  " Man  looketh  on  the  outward 
appearanee,  but  God  looketh  on  the  heart.”  " Love 
is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law.”  What  God  requires  is 
the  service  of  the  heart.  No  ritualistic  forms,  how- 
ever elaborate,  can  meet  his  will ; no  wealth  of  sac- 
rifice, no  ascetic  observance  or  self-immolation.  To 
the  anxious  worshipper  who  inquires.  Wherewith  shall 
I come  before  the  Lord  and  bow  myself  before  the 
high  God  ? Will  the  Lord  be  pleased  with  thousands 
of  rams,  or  with  ten  thousands  of  rivers  of  oil? 
Shall  I give  my  first-bom  for  my  transgression ; the 
fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul?”  The 
startling  answer  comes : " He  hath  showed  thee,  O 
man,  what  is  good ; and  what  doth  the  Lord  require 
of  thee  but  to  do  justly  and  to  love  mercy  and  to 
walk  humbly  with  thy  God?”  Thus  the  meanest, 
the  most  ignorant,  and  the  poorest  of  his  creatures 
may  perfectly  meet  his  will.  As  luminous  as  the 
sunlight  is  this  divine  law,  with  the  truth,  that  genuine 
character  is  what  pleases  God ; that  " truth  in  the 
inward  parts”  commends  the  soul  to  his  approval, 
and  that  every  outward  form  or  inward  exercise, 
apart  from  this  essential  righteousness,  is  vain  and 


AS  REVELATION. 


109 


worthless.  In  this  grand  characteristic,  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  stand  alone  among  the  religious  systems 
of  the  world.  Brahminism  speaks  approvingly  of 
righteousness  of  character,  but  places  formal  obser- 
vances and  ascetic  practices  foremost  in  the  work  of 
making  merit,  and  bringing  the  soul  to  everlasting 
rest.  " Devotion  is  equal  to  the  performance  of  all 
duties.”  “ He  who  has  killed  a cow,  must  wait  all  day 
on  a herd  of  cows  and  stand  inhaling  the  dust  raised 
by  their  hoofs.  At  night,  he  must  sit  near  and  guard 
them.  He  must  stand  while  they  stand,  follow 
when  they  move,  and  lie  down  near  them  when  they 
lie  down.  By  thus  waiting  on  a herd  for  three 
months,  he  atones  for  his  guilt.”  " He  who  can  re- 
peat the  whole  of  the  Eig-Veda  would  be  free  from 
guilt  even  if  he  had  killed  the  inhabitants  of  the 
three  worlds.” 

Buddhism  represents  one  of  its  saints  as  giving 
his  body  for  food  to  a starved  tigress,  and  thus 
attaining  at  once  the  everlasting  rest  without  the 
necessity  of  countless  transmigrations.  The  virtue 
of  the  act  was  not  so  much  in  the  pity  for  the  brute, 
as  in  the  self-abnegation.  Errors  like  these  are 
human,  and  Christianity  itself,  in  its  actual  exhi- 
bitions, has  often  been  disfigured  by  this  human 
blunder.  But  no  such  darkness  dims  the  heavenly 
light.  The  divine  law  utters  no  uncertain  sound. 
” Is  it  such  a fast  tl^at  I have  chosen  ? a day  for  a man 
to  afflict  his  soul  ? Is  it  to  bow  down  his  head  like 
a bulrush,  and  spread  sackcloth  and  ashes  under 
him?  Will  ye  call  this  a fast,  and  an  acceptable  day 
to  the  Lord?  Is  not  this  the  fast  that  I have  chosen. 


110 


MORAL  LAW 


to  loose  the  -bands  of  wickedness,  to  undo  the  heavy 
burdens,  and  to  let  the  oppressed  go  free,  and  that 
ye  break  every  yoke  ? Is  it  not  to  deal  thy  bread  to 
the  hungry,  and  that  thou  bring  the  poor  that  are 
cast  out  to  thy  house  ? When  thou  seest  the  naked 
that  thou  cover  him,  and  that  thou  hide  not  thyself 
from  thine  own  flesh?” — Isa.  58:5-7.  And  then, 
lest  the  mere  outward  performance  be  mistaken  for 
obedience,  we  read  again:  "Though  I bestow  all 
my  goods  to  feed  the  poor,  and  though  I give  my 
body  to  be  burned,  and  have  not  charity,  it  profiteth 
me  nothing.” — ^I  Cor.  13  : 3. 

Again,  because  this  law  is  spiritual,  reading  the 
thought  and  intent  of  the  heart,  it  is  universal, — all 
comprehensive,  embracing  all  rational  beings,  in 
whatever  world,  and  extending  to  every  thought  and 
word  and  deed.  There  is  no  attempt  to  lay  out  in 
detail  the  duty  of  any  being.  The  law  brings  its 
force  to  bear  upon  the  very  fountain  of  action,  and 
makes  it  pure ; then  pure  streams  must  flow  through 
all  the  channels  of  life.  The  form  of  action  will 
vary  with  varying  light  and  changing  relations,  but 
the  obedient  spirit  is  always  the  same.  The  simplest 
child  that  lisps  : " Our  Father  whieh  art  in  Heaven,” 
and  the  loftiest  angel  that  bows  within  the  very  circle 
of  his  glory,  are  one  in  spirit,  children  of  the  Heav- 
enly Father,  alike  approved  of  him.  In  the  same 
great  law  they  And  the  rule  of  life  and  action.  It 
meets  the  want  of  the  least  and  the  greatest,  and  can 
never  be  outgrown.  Even  God  who  proelaims  the 
law,'  commends  himself  to  his  creatures  as  embody- 
ing in  his  action  the  principle  of  the  law.  " Shall 


AS  REVELATION. 


Ill 


not  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right?”  ” A God 
of  truth  and  without  iniquity,  just  and  right  is  he.” 
The  holiness  of  God  is  but  the  love  which  he  requires 
of  his  creatures.  Thus,  under  this  law,  the  universe 
becomes  a kingdom  of  righteousness  and  love,- — the 
Sovereign  himself  leading  the  way  in  the  works  of 
love  which  the  law  requires,  heaven  and  earth  and 
hell  bearing  witness  to  the  beneficence  of  his  sway. 
This  conception  is  too  high  for  the  unaided  human 
reason  to  reach,  but  it  is  not  too  high  for  the  human 
soul  to  accept  and  rejoice  in.  Such  a law  can  never 
grow  old ; it  is  as  fresh  and  vital  now  as  when  it  fell 
upon  the  awe-struck  tribes  at  Sinai.  It  is  the  abso- 
lute righteousness,  valid  for  time  and  for  eternity. 

That  there  were  temporary  and  specific  precepts 
associated  from  time  to  time  with  these  great,  un- 
changing principles,  rather  strengthens  than  weakens 
the  argument.  Out  of  the  great  central  principle, 
specific  and  local  applications  must  always  arise. 
The  excellence  of  the  law  is,  that  it  is  capable  of 
these  specific  adaptations,  and  provides  for  them. 
Special  observances  and  forms  of  worship  are 
arranged  for  those  that  need  them ; but,  from  first  to 
last,  there  is  care  to  distinguish  between  every  formal 
observance  and  the  obedience  of  the  heart.  " Hath 
the  Lord  as  great  delight  in  burnt  offerings  and  sac- 
rifices as  in  obeying  the  voice  of  the  Lord  ? Behold, 
to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice,  and  to  hearken,  than 
the  fat  of  rams.”  No  ambiguity  on  this  point  is  ever 
admitted.  From  the  beginning  to  the  end,  a line  of 
heavenly  light  runs  between  the  essential  and  un- 
changing, and  the  formal  and  temporary. 


112 


MORAL  LAW 


A complete  presentation  of  the  case  would  seem 
to  require  an  examination  of  the  specific  provisions 
of  the  law,  and  an  exhibition  of  the  divine  wisdom 
which  characterizes  them.  Such  a work  lies  beyond 
the  limits  prescribed  by  this  occasion.  Our  present 
view  must  be  general,  and  therefore  less  satisfactory. 
An  allusion  to  a single  specific  precept  must  sufloice, 
that  which  prohibits  the  use  of  images,  — a pre- 
cept appropriate  to  men  in  every  age  and  condition, 
forbidding  the  worship  of  God  under  any  form  of 
nature,  or  any  image  of  "gold  or  silver  or  stone, 
graven  by  art  or  man’s  device.”  Yet  the  law  given 
to  the  people  of  Israel  is  distinguished  from  all 
other  ancient  religions  by  this  prohibition.  The  fire- 
worship  of  the  Persians  was  still  idolatry,  though 
perhaps  less  degrading  than  the  grosser  practices  of 
other  nations,  "who  changed  the  glory  of  the  uncor- 
ruptible God  into  an  image  made  like  to  corruptible 
man,  and  to  birds  and  four-footed  beasts  and  creeping 
things.  To  meet  the  weakness  of  human  nature  in 
its  effort  to  embrace  the  Infinite  Spirit,  and  to  save 
men  from  the  loathsome  degradation  of  idolatry  was 
the  problem  solved  by  the  system  of  worship  and 
of  morals  prescribed  to  the  children  of  Abraham. 
Was  the  wisdom  which  devised  it  simply  human? 

In  its  matter^  then,  we  find  this  ancient  law  satis- 
factory and  complete, — as  appropriate  to-day  as  at 
its  first  announcement,  and  never  to  fail,  though 
heaven  and  earth  pass  away.  Let  us  now  inquire, 
what  there  is  in  the  form  and  manner  of  its  presenta- 
tion which  distinguishes  it  from  other  systems  of 
morality  and  religion,  and  which  indicates  a divine 


AS  REVELATION, 


113 


origin?  In  this  direction,  there  are  two  particulars 
specially  prominent. 

In  the  first  place,  the  law  presents  the  great  ob- 
jects upon  which  obligation  terminates,  in  a definite 
and  vital  form.  The  thought  is  directed  to  God 
and  to  our  neighbor,  — beings  whom  we  know  and 
whose  nature  we  can  understand  though  we  may 
not  comprehend  it.  All  duty,  all  obligation,  finds 
its  object  within  this  circle  of  our  vision.  Duty 
thus  takes  a definite  and  tangible  form.  We  are 
not  set  upon  any  vague  and  uncertain  pursuit, 
left  to  range  the  universe  to  find  where  the  path 
of  duty  lies,  or  where  are  the  objects  to  which  our 
obligation  leads  us.  We  know  at  once  who  has 
claims  upon  us,  and  what  the  nature  of  that  claim 
must  be.  Our  neighbor  is  our  brother,  and  God  is 
our  Father ; we  bear  the  image  of  both.  In  the  light 
of  our  own  nature,  we  understand  our  duty  to  man 
and  to  God.  What  the  love  is  which  fulfils  the  law, 
— the  attitude  of  soul  which  is  right  toward  God 
and  toward  man,  we  cannot  doubt. 

If  human  wisdom  had  framed  the  precept,  it  would 
probably  have  taken  the  abstract  form  : ''  Thou  art  a 
reasonable  being ; obey  the  law  of  thy  higher  nature ; 
act  reasonably;  do  right  for  its  own  sake”;  and 
thus  bewildered  human  creatures  would  have  been 
left,  with  introverted  gaze,  peering  into  the  depths 
of  their  own  consciousness  for  light  upon  the  question 
of  the  reasonable  and  the  right.  All  such  abstract 
statements  are  provided  for  in  the  present  concrete 
form  of  the  law.  The  law  embraces  every  such  prin- 
ciple, and  covers  every  conceivable  duty  of  all 


114 


MORAL  LAW 


beings  for  all  time,  and  makes  the  way  of  duty 
as  luminous  as  the  light  of  heaven.  It  takes  the 
thought,  at  once,  away  from  self,  first  to  God  and 
then  to  man,  providing  for  a true  and  wholesome 
activity. 

But  beyond  this,  in  the  objects  presented  to  our 
regard,  we  find  the  motives  to  obedience  which  the 
human  soul  requires.  The  natm-e  of  these  objects 
appeals  to  our  hearts.  Over  us  bends  the  Father 
of  Spirits,  infinite  in  his  excellence  and  all-embrac- 
ing in  his  love, — the  Lord  our  God,  whom  we  are  to 
love  with  all  the  heart.  How  reasonable  and  just 
the  duty ! How  strong  the  claim,  and  what  motives, 
in  the  excellence  and  majesty  of  his  being,  for  a 
response  to  that  claim ! By  our  side  stands  our 
neighbor,  encompassed  with  all  human  infirmity  and 
want, — child  of  the  same  Father,  with  a vital,  sen- 
tient nature  like  our  own,  calling  for  our  neighborly 
regard  by  the  significance  of  his  present  experience 
and  the  reach  of  his  destiny;  and  again  the  law 
comes  ; " Love  him  as  thyself.”  In  the  objects  thus 
presented,  we  have  the  highest  motives  to  obedience. 
There  is  divine  wisdom  in  so  shaping  the  law  as  to 
bring  these  motives  in  full  force  upon  the  soul.  How 
feeble  and  cold,  in  comparison,  is  any  abstract  utter- 
ance of  human  philosophy, — be  reasonable,  be  just, 
do  right,  respect  every  interest,  regard  all  being. 
Living,  vital  motives,  we  have  seen,  are  the  great 
want  in  any  moral  system,  and  the  divine  law  takes 
hold  of  the  heart  by  this  direct  presentation  of  the 
objects  of  duty. 

The  second  feature  in  the  manner  of  presentation 


REVELATION. 


115 


is,  that  the  principle  of  obligation  is  made  a divine 
command,  and  comes  to  men  not  merely  as  an 
attainment  of  human  thought,  an  axiom  which  the 
reason  intuitively  affirms  in  its  own  cold  light,  but 
as  enacted  by  divine  authority,  and  enforced  by 
the  personal  power  of  a present  God.  Moses  and 
the  prophets  of  Judaism  and  Christianity  do  not 
stand  before  the  people  as  gifted  with  a clearer 
insight,  a genius  for  religion  or  an  ethical  inspi- 
ration, by  which  they  discern  the  great  principle  of 
obligation.  They  bring  to  men  the  law  of  God’s 
kingdom,  the  express  will  of  Jehovah,  and  it  comes 
with  all  the  force  which  divine  authority  can  give  it. 
It  was  not  enough  that  God  endowed  men  with  an 
ethical  nature, — reason  to  understand  the  principle 
of  duty  as  they  know  all  necessary  truth,  — then  to 
leave  them  to  follow  their  own  natural  light.  It  is 
undoubtedly  true,  as  Paul  has  announced,  that  those 
who  have  not  the  law  are  a law  unto  themselves, 
showing  the  enactments  of  the  law  written  upon 
their  hearts.  But  how  feeble  is  this  natural  sense 
of  duty,  compared  with  the  impression  which  the 
express  will  of  God  conveys,  with  all  the  force  of 
his  majesty  and  authority,  his  fatherly  prerogative 
and  his  yearning  love  ! 

Back  of  this  presentation  of  duty  as  divine  law, 
there  stands  the  great  fact  of  God’s  personality;  a 
fact  which  was  essentially  lost  to  the  other  nations, 
but  which  was  the  basis  of  all  religious  thought 
among  the  Hebrews.  They  are  taught  to  regard 
God  as  the  Creator,  and  themselves  as  the  work  of 
his  hand ; not  an  emanation  from  some  uncon- 


116 


MORAL  LAW 


scious,  sleeping  divinity,  from  whom  they  sprang 
without  his  purpose,  as  dreams  gather  about  one  who 
sleeps ; not  the  work  of  some  intermediate  power, 
by  which  they  were  separated  from  the  knowledge 
or  regard  of  the  eternal,  self-existent  God.  Of 
such  ideas  the  wmrld  was  full.  India  and  Persia 
and  Egypt  could  have  furnished  such  conceptions  of 
God,  and  such  only.  But  to  the  Hebrew  thought, 
God  was  presented  full  of  active,  intelligent,  and  sen- 
sitive life.  He  had  " made  the  heavens  and  earth  and 
sea  and  all  that  in  them  is,”  with  a definite  and  settled 
purpose ; he  still  ruled  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
and  in  the  kingdom  of  men,  and  often  revealed  him- 
self in  mighty  displays  of  his  presence ; using  the 
powers  of  nature  as  his  servants,  going  before  the 
people-  in  the  pillar  of  cloud  by  day,  and  of  fire  by 
night;  leading  them  through  the  wilderness  as  the 
shepherd  his  flock, — intensely  interested  in  their 
character  and  condition,  claiming  their  love  as  a 
good  to  himself,  and  from  his  open  hand  scattering 
blessings  in  return.  From  this  Sovereign,  Father 
and  Friend,  comes  the  law  to  them  and  to  mankind, 
— the  will  of  the  high  and  lofty  One  who  inhabits 
eternity ; and  who  dwells,  too,  with  the  humble 
and  contrite  spirit.  Such  a law  is  no  mere  sys- 
tem of  ethics,  no  human  philosophy,  but  a divine 
religion,  taking  hold  of  the  hearts  of  men  with 
all  the  force  with  which  God  appeals  to  our 
religious  nature.  Men  are  naturally  religious. 
The  impulse  of  reverence  and  worship  is  stronger 
and  more  lasting  than  any  other,  except  the  mere 
animal  instincts  and  passions.  In  the  world,  gen- 


AS  REVELATION, 


117 


erally,  the  religious  tendency  was  wholly  separated 
from  morality.  Men  worshipped  with  costly  sacri- 
fices and  painful  observances  and  penances,  not  with 
a loving  and  contrite  heart,  dutiful  to  God  and 
benevolent  toward  man.  Duty  to  God  was  utterly 
divorced  from  the  claims  of  men,  so  that  these 
claims  were  rather  counteracted  than  sustained  by 
the  claims  of  religion.  It  is  probably  true  that  re- 
ligion, even  in  this  impulsive  form,  with  the  ethical 
element  wholly  eliminated,  counteracted,  in  some 
degree,  the  gross  animal  impulses,  and  saved  from 
the  loathsome  degradation  of  mere  animal  life ; so 
that  it  is  reasonable  to  say  that  Paganism,  with 
all  its  idolatry,  is  better  than  no  religion. 

But  it  was  no  mere  human  thought  that  bound  re- 
ligion and  morality  together  by  an  indissoluble  bond, 
placing  the  claims  of  God  and  the  claims  of  man  on  a 
common  foundation,  making  religion  morality,  and 
morality  religion,  and  enforcing  the  common  duty 
by  all  the  motives  which  appeal  to  man’s  religious 
nature.  Eeligion,  without  morality,  is  a blind  force, 
working  mightily,  but  not  beneficently.  Morality, 
without  religion,  is  feeble  and  mechanical  and  hope- 
less. Combined,  they  constitute  the  true  human  life 
which  pleases  God  and  blesses  man.  Where,  in 
the  history  of  the  race,  have  they  been  bound  to- 
gether and  made  one,  as  in  this  perfect  law  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures ; and  by  what  mightier  motive 
could  such  a law  be  enforced?  ”I  am  Jehovah,  thy 
God,  which  brought  thee  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Eg}rpt.  Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods  before  me.” 
” Thou  shalt  not  avenge  nor  bear  any  grudge  against 


118 


MORAL  LAW 


the  children  of  thy  people,  but  thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself:  I am  Jehovah.”  All  the  power 
which  the  thought  of  God  has  over  the  hearts  of 
men,  is  brought  to  bear  in  the  enforcement  of  this 
common  duty,  of  love  to  God  and  love  to  man.  How 
much  stronger  is  the  motive  than  that  which  comes 
with  the  simple  apprehension  of  the  duty  by  one’s 
own  understanding  ! For  the  child  to  know  by  his 
own  judgment  what  is  proper  for  him  to  do,  is  one 
thing ; to  have  added  to  that  perception  all  the  force 
which  comes  with  the  personal  presence  and  benign 
authority  of  the  parent,  is  a very  different  thing ; 
and  this  only  feebly  illustrates  the  power  of  religious 
motives  over  the  consciences  and  the  hearts  of  men. 
Coming  from  God,  the  law  naturally  arid  inevitably 
takes  this  form.  If  it  came  from  man,  its  form 
remains  without  explanation,  — it  has  no  natural 
origin. 

It  has  sometimes  been  a matter  of  surprise  that 
in  connection  with  the  law  in  the  Old  Testament, 
so  little  reference  is  made,  or,  as  some  claim,  none 
at  all,  to  the  considerations  of  a future  life, — that  no 
motives  to  obedience  are  drawn  from  the  world  to 
come.  But  let  us  consider  that  in  God’s  personal 
presence  all  interests  are  brought  together.  The  seen 
and  the  unseen  world  are  the  sarpie  to  him, — all 
” naked  and  open  to  the  eyes  of  him  with  whom  we 
have  to  do.”  To  one  who  realizes  God’s  presence, 
the  oneness  of  his  kingdom  is  a simple  fact.  The 
people  of  Israel  were  taught,  in  obedience,  to  expect 
God’s  favor;  in  disobedience,  to  dread  his  frown. 
That  favor  meant  life,  all  that  men  hope  for,  and 


AS  REVELATION, 


119 


his  frown  meant  death,  all  that  men  dread,  wher- 
ever in  the  universe  his  power  extends.  Under 
God’s  direct  eye,  as  they  seemed  to  be,  it  would  not 
be  natural  or  important  to  discriminate  between  the 
seen  and  the  unseen  world.  The  law  was  God’s  law, 
and  carried  with  it  all  the  motives  which  gather  about 
the  relations  of  men  to  God. 

We  have  thus  seen,  that  in  its  matter  the  ethical 
system  of  the  Scriptures  involves  the  absolute 
morality  and  the  absolute  religion;  that  it  was 
complete  in  its  first  announcement,  and  has  been 
extended  in  the  later  Scriptures  only  by  new  appli- 
cations, — not  by  any  addition  to  its  principles. 
Other  systems  indicate  a struggle  of  the  human  soul 
toward  the  apprehension  of  those  ideas,  and  when 
they  make  any  approximation  to  this  standard,  we 
are  led  to  rejoice  that  men  in  the  dark  places  of  the 
earth  have  had  somewhat  of  the  true  light ; but  this 
law  has  stood,  and  must  forever  stand,  as  the  model 
by  which  all  other  systems  are  to  be  judged.  When 
human  philosophy  shall  have  attained  to  the  most 
catholic  expression  of  the  law  under  which  man  is 
placed  by  his  nature  and  relations,  shall  have  collated 
and  generalized  all  systems  and  all  forms  of  thought 
for  the  expression  of  absolute  truth,  the  product 
can  be  only  that  which  we  have  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  which  comes  to  us  as  the  voice  of  God, — the 
first  and  great  commandment,  and  the  second,  which 
is  like  unto  it. 

We  have  seen  that  in  its  manner  and  form  of  pre- 
sentation, this  law  meets  the  great  human  want  of 
motives  to  obedience,  combining  and  concentrating 


120 


MORAL  LAW 


all  the  considerations  of  religion  and  humanity,  and 
impressing  itself  upon  the  deepest  and  most  perma- 
nent elements  of  human  nature,  thus  becoming  the 
law  written  on  the  heart.  To  the  full  establishment 
of  this  law  among  men,  the  whole  course  of  divine 
providence  seems  to  have  been  directed.  The 
Saviour’s  work  in  the  world  had  this  significance. 
His  words,  such  as  man  never  spake,  were  a restate- 
ment of  the  precepts  of  the  law ; his  life  was  an 
embodiment  of  its  purity,  and  his  death  so  reinforced 
by  its  power  the  weakness  of  the  law,  that  we  are 
permitted  to  see  its  righteousness  fulfilled  in  those  who 
walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit.  Well 
might  he  say,  I came  not  to  destroy  the  law  but  to  fulfil ! 

Whence,  then,  is  this  law?  from  heaven  or  of 
men?  If  we  say,  of  men,  the  law  will  then  not 
be  invalidated.  It  must  still  stand  the  complete 
and  perfect  expression  of  duty,  — the  law  for  all 
being  and  all  time.  But  we  propose  to  ourselves 
a problem  difficult  of  solution,  when  we  limit  our- 
selves to  such  conditions.  How  is  it  that  this  mar- 
vellous combination  of  religion  and  humanity  sprung 
up  among  the  people  of  Israel,  at  the  time  of  their 
deliverance  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt,  and  held  its 
place  from  that  day  on ; and  that,  to-day,  all  nations 
are  compelled  to  accept  it  as  the  ultimate  and  abso- 
lute truth  in  morality  and  religion  ? Can  we  name 
any  human  source  from  which  Moses  obtained  this 
law,  or  can  we  account  for  any  such  quickening  of 
the  religious  and  ethical  sense  of  that  people  as  to 
yield  us  the  marvellous  product?  This  law  was 
not  one  of  the  treasures  gathered,  when  the  people 


AS  REVELATION. 


121 


" spoiled  the  Egyptians/^  Egypt  had  no  sueh  treas- 
ure to  give  them.  What  the  Egyptians  thought 
and  said  of  God  and  man  for  a thousand  years 
before,  and  a thousand  years  after,  we  read  to-day 
upon  their  temples  and  their  tombs.  Moses  was 
learned  in  all  their  wisdom ; but  the  law  of  Moses  is 
not  the  wisdom  of  Egypt.  The  people  set  forth  the 
wisdom  of  Egypt,  when  they  bowed  to  the  Molten 
Calf,  and  said : " These  be  thy  gods,  O Israel,  which 
brought  thee  up,  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt.  The 
mummied  bulls  of  Memphis  show  where  the  people 
got  that  lesson.  This  was  what  Egypt  gave  them. 
The  Vedas  and  the  Zend-avestas  of  the  farther 
East,  giving  the  concentrated  wisdom  of  India  and 
of  Persia,  afford  no  light  upon  the  subject.  Those 
ancient  writings  exhibit  the  uncertain  feeling  after 
truth  which  naturally  characterizes  the  human  soul, 
with  now  and  then  a flash  of  light  out  of  the  dark- 
ness ; but  no  steady  luminary  to  which  the  nations 
may  look,  rises  in  that  eastern  sky.  The  star  seen 
by  the  Wise  Men  of  the  East  stood  over  the  manger 
where  He  was  cradled  who  was  born  King  of  the 
Jews. 

The  law  which  the  Sacred  Scriptures  embody  is 
beyond  all  question  the  law  of  God.  If  he  should 
speak  to  men  from  heaven  to  show  them  their  duty 
and  enforce  the  obligation,  he  would  give  us  no 
other  law.  There  is  no  other  law  in  heaven  to  be 
given.  When,  then,  we  accept  it  as  God’s  law, 
uttered  by  his  voice  and  written  hj  his  Anger,  we 
are  sustained,  not  only  by  the  testimony  of  Moses 
and  the  people,  but  by  all  the  inherent  probabilities 
of  the  case. 


V. 


THE  INCARNATION, 


BY  TRUMAN  M.  POST,  D.  D. 


All  things  are  of  God.  The  moral  forces  of  the 
universe  are  in  Him.  To  evolve  and  apply 
these  forces,  is  its  great  moral  problem ; to  bring  the 
creature  into  sympathy  with  the  Creator,  the  great 
measure  for  its  moral  restoration  and  perfection. 

To  effect  this,  God  must  reveal  himself  ; and  to  a 
race  embraced  within  a world  pf  sense.  He  must 
reyeal  himself  in  the^oklbie-and  sfelisible  : f- 

There  are  three  ways  in  which  God  may  disclose 
himself  in  the  visible  and  sensible : Firsts  In  the 

fixed  order  of  nature,  or  by  the  system  of  immutable 
laws  : Second^  By  the  interruption  or  transcending 

of  those  laws,  in  attestation  of  a verbal  revelation : 
Thirds  By  personal  representation,  attested  in  like 
manner. 

Combining  with  all  these,  and  supplementing  or 
modifying  them,  is  the  disclosure  of  God  in  our 
moral  consciousness.  This,  combined  with  the  first 
above  mentioned,  or  the  disclosure  of  God  by  fixed 
laws,  makes  the  religion  of  nature;  and  this,  per- 
verted and  corrupted  by  human  imagination,  passion, 
and  pravity,  constitutes  that  of  the  heathen  world. 

122 


THE  INGARNATION. 


123 

Its  combination  with  the  second  gives  us  the  He- 
brew sptem.  Its  blending  with  the  third  appears 
in  Christianity^/ 

The  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God,  or  the  revela- 
tion of  the  divine  nature  in  a human  person,  is  the 
peculiar  distinction  of  Christianity.  The  superior 
efficiency  of  that  revelation  for  the  moral  renovation 
and  perfection,;  of  man,  as  demonstrated  by  history 
andthe  «hilos^K^of  mind,  goes  far  to  prove  the 
divine  original  of  that  religion  of  whiph  it  is  the 
---distinctive  and  capital  characteristic,  dhis  is  the 
scope  of  my  present  argument^  , * ^ ' 

My  theme  is.  The  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God  as 
^ the  great  restorative  and  conservative  moral  force  of 
the  world. 

I , Christian  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  has  no 

' talog^  amongst  the  religions  of  the  world.  In 
C aspect  and  significance  entirely  aloof  from  the 

^ Avatars  or  incarnations  of  Brahminism  or  Buddhism 
and  the  like,  it  stands  in  Christianity  unique  and 
alone.  My  argument  claims  that  this  is  one  of  those 
doctrines  that  both  vindicate  themselves  and  the  sys- 
tems to  which  they  belong;  one  which,  not  invented 
or  discovered  by  human  reason,  yet  approves  itself, 
when  announced,  to  our  reason,  as  peculiarly  adapted 
and  requisite  to  accomplish  the  moral  salvation  of  our 
race;  and  that  its  adaptation  to  elfect  this,  the 
highest  aimofa??  religions,  is  of  force  to  establish  the 
trutl^f  that  in  which  alone  it  is  found. 

/ . argument  assumes  the  existence  of  a God,  ra- 
f tional  and  moral ; and  infers,  from  a perceived  fitness 
ot  things  to  produce  rational  and  beneficent  results, 


124 


THE  INCARNATION. 


their  origin  from  Him.  It  applies  this  reasoning  to 
the  scheme  of  moral  forces  in  Christianity,  and 
especially  to  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation.  And 
thus,  as  the  demonstrated  adaptation  of  the  law  of 
gravitation  to  preserve  the  order  of  the  natural 
universe  argues  its  reality,  so  indications  of  the 
adaptation  of  the  incarnation  to  restore  and  conserve 
the  order  of  the  moral  world,  may,  to  the  extent  they 
are  disclosed,  be  reasonably  regarded  as  furnishing 
a presumption  of  its  truth. 

We  argue,  accordingly,  that  as  presenting  the  pro- 
foundest  philosophy  of  the  redemption  of  fallen  man, 
and  as  being  clearly  a " wisdom  and  power  unto  sal- 
vation,” as  unique  as  it  is  requisite,  this  doctrine 
proves  itself  to  be  of  God ; and  the  more  so,  as  it 
was  first  promulgated  by  those  who  were  not  phi- 
losophers, and  who  had  no  consciousness  or  ambition 
of  philosophic  system. 

As  already  intimated,  my  argument  will  regard 
the  incarnation  as  the  veritable  revelation  of  God  in 
a human  person.  In  thus  defining,  it  will  essay  no 
sharp  adjustment  of  controverted  ontological  or 
hypostatical  relations  of  Christ  to  the  Father.  Into 
questions  of  correlation  between  them,  or  of  the 
duality  or  singleness  of  natures  in  Christ,  it  is  not 
requisite  to  my  pr^ent  aim  to  enter But,  (avoiding 
philological  or  herjneneutical  controversies  y*  my  argu- 
ment will  be.pred.icated)on  that  unity  of ''Christ  with 
God  that  the  lowest  interpretation  of  common  Scrip- 
ture statements  seems  to  necessitate ; a unity  that 
presents  Jesus  Christ  as  veritably  in  himself  a 
revelation  of  God. 


THE  INCARNATION. 


125 


f Sudi  a unity  and  such  a revelation  as  seem  of 
' necessity  implied  in  the  declarations  of  the  Evange- 
^ chapter  of  Johil^"]Sro  man  hath 

seen  Grod  at  any  time  ; the  only  begotten  Son,  which 
is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father.  He  hath  declared 
Him.”  And  again : " In  the  beginning  was  the  word, 
and  the  word  was  with  God,  and  the  word  was 
God.  The  same  was  in  the  beginning  with  God.” 
"And  the  world  was  made  by  Him.”  "And  the 
word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us,  and 
we  beheld  his  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten 
of  the  Father  full  of  grace  and  truth.”  And  again 
(Matt.  1 : 27)  ; "No  man  knoweth  the  Son,  but 
the  Father,  neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father, 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will 
reveal  Him.”  I mean  such  a personal  revelation 
Grod  as  seems  implied  in  the  declaration  that 
Jesus  was  " the  brightness  of  his  glory  and  the  ex- 
press image  of  his  person”;  that  " God  hath  shined 
in  our  hearts  to  give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of 
the  glory  of  God,  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ ; ” that 
" in  Him  dwelt  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily  ” ; 
such  a revelation  as  could  justify  Christ’s  own  assev- 
eration that  his  words  and  his  works  were  not  his 
own,  but  truly  God’s;  and  that  "he  who  had  seen 
Him,  had  seen  the  Father.” 

Now,  language  of  this  description,  it  seems  to  me, 
can  imply  nothing  less  than  that  Christ  was,  in  his 
own  person,  in  a sense  which  was  true  of  no  other 
in  human  form,  a veritable  revealer  of  God ; not 
of  Go^  in  the  inflnitude  of  his  nature, — for  the 
infinite  cannot  be  revealed  to  or  by  the  finite,— but 


126 


THE  INCARNATION. 


of  God  in  the  quality  of  his  moral  attributes.^  full  of 
grace  and  truth,  of  pity,  mercy,  and  love ; such  a 
revelation  as  would  have  power  to  transfigure  our 
moral  nature,  so  that  we,  "beholding  as  in  a glass 
the  glory  of  the  Lord,  should  be  changed  into  the 
same  image,  from  glory  to  glory Apart  from  the 
question  of  the  truth  or  falsity  oniie  Christian 
scheme,  the  intent  of  that  scheme,  it  seems  to  me, 
unmistakably  is,  to  set  forth  Christ  as,  to  this  extent, 
a perso^nal  revelation  of  God.  To  this  intent,  I shall 
argue^^-^ 

argument  assumes  also  a moral  fall  of  man;  a 
fact  as-]^mt  in  nature  and  history,  as  in  Scripture  ; 
and  which  ^ apart  from  all  controverted  dogmas  of  its 
origin,  its  depth  or  exten^  clearly  needs  restoration 
and  cure.  The  actual  existence  and  prevalence  of 
moral  evil  in  our  world  needs  no  proof,  and  hardly 
more  does  the  natural  downward  tendency  of  souls 
which  have  once  admitted  evil  within  themselves, 
and  the  consequent  need  of  deliverance  hy  a power 
from  without  themselves.  My  aim  will  be  to  show 
the  natural  efliciency  of  the  revelation  of  God  in  a 
human  person  to  accomplish  such  a deliverance,  and 
the  evidence  thus  accruing  to  Christianity,  which 
presents  this  remedy  for  the  moral  malady  of  man. 

This  argument  resolves  itself  into  the  following 
propositions : — 

1.  In  order  to  salvation,  i.  e.  in  order  to  his 
highest  excellency  and  bliss,  man  must  be  conformed 
morally  to  God. 

2.  Such  conformity  can  be  wrought  in  the  soul 
only  by  sympathy  with  God,  or  the  feeling  of  his 


Tim  INOAItNATION. 


127 


conscious  personal  presence  applying  itself  directly 
to  the  soul. 

3.  Such  sympathy  can  be  created  only  by  God’s 
revelation  of  Himself. 

1st.  By  a person,  and 

2d.  By  a human  person, — i.  e.  one  which,  while 
representing  truly  the  divine  nature,  is  exhibited 
also  as  living,  acting,  speaking,  feeling,  suifering, 
under  human  limitations  and  conditions. 

^^hese  propositions  can  be  proved,  both  analytically 
and  historically-^  We  will  consider,-^' 

First,  the  necessity  of  conformity  to  God,  mor- 
ally, in  order  to  salvation. 

That  to  this  end  the  soul  must  be  in  moral  accord 
with  God, — with  that  Being  who  is  the  fountain,  the 
very  element  of  its  existence,  in  whom  it  must  for- 
evjer  live,  move,  and  have  being;  with  the  ever-pres- 
ent, all-pervading,  all-embracing,  eternally  regnant 
spirit  that  must  forever  enfold  it  with  its  emotion,  its 
will,  and  its  power, — seems  a proposition  requiring  no 
argument.  Discrepancy  with  Him  must  inevitably 
be  everlasting  jangle  and  discord  with  the  universe ; 
a condition  as  hopeless  of  happiness  as  would  be  that 
of  a man  with  his  present  physical  nature  immersed 
in  the  sun.  God  must,  by  the  laws  of  being,  be  to 
a soul  not  conformed  to  Him  a " consuming  fire.” 

He  must  be  so  by  the  natural  efiect  of  mind  acting 
on  mind. 

Mind  acting  on  mind  is  the  mightiest  factor  we 
know  of  in  this  life,  of  pleasure  or  pain;  beyond  all 
delights  of  sense,  beyond  all  tortures  of  poison  or 
steel  or  scourge  or  flame.  From  human  hate  or 


128 


THE  INCARNATION. 


scorn,  men  gladly  hide  in  the  very  grave.  So  they 
exult  to  pluck  the  guerdon  of  love  or  fame,  in  the 
very  jaws  of  death.  What  then  must  be  the  action 
of  the  mind  of  God,  forever  raying  its  emotion  of 
love  or  abhorrence  on  the  soul,  but  a Heaven  or  a 
Hell? 

Moreover,  in  order  to  eternal  life,  man  must  be 
conformed  to  God  as  the  perfect  archetype  of  beauty 
and  right ; else  the  eternal  necessity  of  our  moral 
being,  which  unites  virtue  to  happiness  and  vice  to 
misery,  must  be  broken. 

Heaven  is  no  ,sap|)hire  city,  no  robes  of  white,  no 
walls  of  amethyst  and  gold.  It  must  be  found  in  the 
soul’s  harmony  with  the  All-good,  the  Almighty  and 
the  Everlasting.  Else,  nearer  the  blazing  throne  the 
worse ; the  soul  would  hurry  to  hide  in  the  very 
shadow  of  death  from  the  blasting  beauty  of  God. 

The  light  is  beautiful,  and  sweet  is  it  to  the  eye  to 
behold  the  sun ; but  to  the  eye  diseased,  its  beauty 
and  sweetness  become  shafts  of  flame.  Sweet  is 
music ; but  to  the  ear  diseased  the  most  delicious 
strains  ever  borne  on  mortal  airs  grate  torturing 
discord.  So  it  must  be  to  the  soul  of  man  in  this 
universe  not  in  accord  with  its  Creator. 

In  the  second  place,  the  power  to  secure  this  conform 
mity  must  be  sought  in  the  divine  nature  itself^ 
vealed  to  man ; not  only  as  thus  disclosing  the  para- 
digm to  which  the  soul  must  be  conformed,  but  also 
the  forces  to  effect  such  conformity.  God  Himself  is 
the  mightiest  of  formative  forces  applied  to  the  human 
soul.  The  God  we  worship  ever  forms  us  to  his  own 
image,  be  he  Jehovah  or  Juggernaut,  a Christ  or  a 


- , • Tim  INCARNATION.  ^ 129 

\ : i ..i)  , , "-f 

Belial.  The  mightiest,  certainly,  if  not  the  only 
power  to  restore  the  fallen  soul,  is  in(fee  evolution 
of  the  moral  God^ — the  power  to  new-create,  in  the 
original  creator.  This -evolutioa  requires  a personal 
revelation.  Accordingly,  to  unfold  and  apply  to  souls 
hiS“Owa4dea  throughft  revelation  in  a human  person, 
is  the  Christian  scheme  of  salvation. 

In  accordance  with  thk  aim  it  is  noteworthy,  the 
forces  of  that  scheme  are  all  eminently  and  character- 
istically persona?  rather  than  dogmatic.  The  universe 
is  to  be  saved  by  a person,  not  a precept,  a thesis,  or 
a philosophy.  Salvation  is  through  faith  in  a person ; 
is  believing  in,  being  in,  abiding  in,  living  or  dying 
in,  a person.  It  is  putting  on,  being  baptized 
into,  confessing,  serving-,  loving  a person.  The  term 
Christianity  is  not  found  in  the  New  Testament.  It 
is  faith  in  Christ.  All  is  Christ.  Impersonalities, 
abstractions,  qualities  separate  from  subjects,  graces 
from  persons,  figure  little.  Prominent  ever,  over  all 
its  field  of  vision,  is  a living  form,  a face,  a person. 
The  whole  system,  its  entire  genius,  looks  person- 
ward.  Everything  in  ritual  and  doctrine  is  adjusted 
and  phrased  to  bring  before  the  mind  a person.  This 
is  the  objective  aim  and  view.  The  creed  is  ever 
the  mere  star-glass.;  Christ  Himself,  ever  the  morn- 
ing star.  Not  an  intellectual  or  ethical  system,  not 
a scheme  of  abstract  graces  and  virtues,  but  a living 
soul,  that  wears  all  graces  and  virtues  as  his  embodi- 
ment, and  quickens  through  all  with  a life, — who 
is  indeed  self-styled  as  Himself  " the  way,  the  truth 
and  the  life,”  — is  the  Redeemer  of  the  world. 

In  this  way  alone,  through  a person  who  is  in  the 


130 


THE  INCARNATION. 


bosom  of  the  Father,  was  redemption  practicable. 
For  thus  only  could  the  saving  forces  which  are  in 
God  be  brought  to  apply  themselves  adequately  to 
man’s  soul.  God  is  a person.  A person  can  be 
properly  expressed  or  revealed  only  by  a person.  No 
abstractions  could  do  it,  no  mere  form  of  words,  no 
dogma,  no  system.  A soul  is  so  separated  from  a 
mere  attribute,  is  of  such  an  entirely  different  order 
of  existence,  that  it  cannot  be  represented  by  it. 
Abstractions  have  no  life  in  them,  no  warmth,  no 
plastic  power ; mere  unsubstantial  phantasms  or  con- 
cepts of  the  mind.  A religion  consisting  of  them 
would  be  the  most  shadowy  and  powerless  of  things. 
To  the  million,  the  purely  spiritual  and  infinite  is 
simply  inconceivable ; and  to  the  sage,  equally  an 
impracticable  mystery. 

A God  attempted  to  be  disclosed  simply  through 
these,  could  be  no  Saviour,  certainly,  of  the  mass ; 
his  gospel  no  gospel  for  the  poor.  They  know  and 
feel  simply  things  in  the  concrete.  They  require  sen- 
suous imagery  or  embodiment.  No  mere  philoso- 
phies or  theologies  are  to  them  revelations  of  God, 
any  more  than  a treatise  on  optics  is  light,  or  an 
analysis  of  colors  is  picture. 

When  I claim  that  God  can  be  adequately  revealed 
only  by  a person,  I mean  (as  I have  premised)  the 
living  God,  the  moral  God;  something  beyond  a 
force,  a principle,  a dynamic  element. 

Those  that  use  the  term  ” God  ” to  denote  simply 
these,  seem  to  me  to  violate  the  essential  idea  of  the 
word,  to  use  language  nonsensically,  and  by  a misno- 
mer to  convert  an  attribute  into  a substance,  a predi- 
cate into  a subject. 


THE  INCARNATION. 


131 


God,  as  a moral  person,  cannot  be  revealed  by 
general  laws  farther  than  as  the  mere  operator  of 
those  laws.  Reasoning  from  the  consciousness  of 
our  own  moral  constitution  to  God  as  its  author,  we 
may  believe  God  is  a moral  person,  and  as  such  dwells 
behind  these  laws.  But  the  laws  themselves  disclose 
only  a fixed  order,  that  turns  not  aside  for  pity  or 
love  or  justice,  that  never  forgives,  never  relents ; 
crushing  alike  whatever  comes  in  its  path,  the  inno- 
cent and  lovely  equally  with  the  foul  and  the  guilty. 

It  is  true,  God  as  a moral  person  may  be  evidenced 
by  the  visible  arrest  or  interruption  of  those  laws  in 
the  interest  of  truth,  justice,  or  mercy,  especially  if,  as 
in  case  of  the  Jews,  such  arrest  and  suspension  are 
associated  with  voice  and  vision,  authenticating  law 
and  verbal  enunciation.  But  still  it  is  God  the  infi- 
nite, the  incomprehensible,  the  unapproachable,  the 
ever-veiled ; one  tokening  himself  in  signs  and 
wonders,  but  hiding  in  the  thick  darkness  or  access- 
less light. 

How  dim  and  feeble  such  a disclosure ; how  inad- 
equate to  the  wants  and  capacities,  at  least  of  the 
millions  ; how  far  beyond  their  reach  of  vivid,  assim- 
ilative, conscious  sympathy ! They  require  to  this 
end  a visible  person  exhibiting  the  divine  love  and 
sympathy  in  life,  action,  and  suflfering. 

No  mere  verbal  predication  of  attributes  suffices ; 
although,  such  a revelation  through  a person,  having 
once  been  made,  words  are  competent  to  perpetuate  it 
historically  and  doctrinally.  On  the  basis  of  recoi*ded 
and  attested  fact,  the  human  mind  can  call  up  and 
'^^ontinue  to  itself  such  a revelation,  with  the  power 


THE  IKCABNATION. 


132 

of  present  reality.  The  more  especially  may  it  do 
this  with  the  preternatural  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
which  the  Christian  scheme  presents ; and  it  is  legiti- 
mate, in  arguing  that  scheme,  to  argue  from  the 
standpoint  of  its  own  provisions.  With  the  preter- 
natural aid  of  the  Divine  Spirit  promised  to  assist  the 
conceptions  of  the  human  mind  as  a perpetual  sug- 
gestion and  continuation,  so  to  speak,  of  the  present 
Christ,  our  mind  is  certainly  adequate,  a personal 
revelation  having  been  once  made,  to  perpetuate  that 
revelation  in  its  thought  and  sentiment.  But  this 
revelation  will  tend  in  each  mind  to  clothe  itself 
with  personal  embodiment  and  feature,  adapted  to 
the  experience,  the  idiosyncrasies,  and  the  moral 
tastes  and  needs  of  the  individual.  , 

And  here  let  us  note  the  divine  wisdom  of  the  New 
Testament  Kevelation,  in  that  while  in  Christ  the 
moral  God  is  clearly  disclosed,  the  corporeal  Christ 
is  no  where  delineated.  Of  the  mightiest,  most 
glorious  personage  that  has  entered  the  circle  of 
time,  no  picture,  no  statue,  no  trace,  not  even  a hint 
historical,  is  left,  whereby  to  frame  a corporeal 
likeness.*  Each  mind  is  left  to  its  own  ideal, 
fashioned  as  it  will  be  by  its  own  moral  taste  or  pe- 
culiar spiritual  want,  so  that  each  human  soul  sees  its 
own  face  of  Christ ; and  while  the  historical  Christ 
retires  behind  the  darkness  of  the  crucifixion  or  the 
ascension-cloud,  the  personal  Christ  still  walks  the 
earth  with  forever-open  face,  and  as  million-visaged 
as  the  ideals  of  the  sons  of  men. 

* I need  not  say,  I regard  the  famous  epistle  of  Publius  Lentulus  as 
a forgery. 


THE  INCARNATION. 


133 


And  here  again  we  note  another  of  the  peculiar 
moral  forces  of  the  Christian  scheme.  This  personal 
Christ  is  no  mere  idealization  of  a dead  sage,  saint,  or 
hero,  no  mere  historic  memory  embodied,  as  of  an 
Epamiiiondas  or  a Plato.  He  is  no  past  personage. 
We  go  to  no  tomb  to  find  Him.  He  lives  evermore, 
and  is  conceived  of  as  present,  not  only  in  thought, 
but  in  reality,  to  each  and  every  soul,  everywhere  to 
the  end  of  time ; revealed  to  faith  and  love,  though 
hid  the  while  to  sense. 

Thus  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  a Christ, 
uneclipsed  by  time  or  death,  is  to  shine  forth  on  the 
earth  as  long  as  the  sun,  that  face  living  and  present 
to  each  and  all  of  the  sons  of  men,  and  beaming  on 
them  with  a sympathy  assimilating  the  human  to  the 
divine. 

Thus  we  have  what  Plato  desiderates  in  his  Phsedo  ; 
that  very  form  and  face  of  virtue,  which,  according 
to  his  thought,  could  it  be  seen  by  our  bodily  eyes, 
would  excite  in  us  a wonderful  love,  and  captivate  us 
with  its  beauty.  But  that  which  thus  captivates  is 
no  mere  abstraction  or  intellectual  conception.  Such 
breed  in  us  no  love,  no  enthusiasm,  no  assimilative 
sympathy.  But  what  we  have  before  us  is  a purely 
and  perfectly  virtuous  being in  which  all  graces  and 
excellences  are  but  phases  of  a living  soul ; the  lofti- 
est, purest,  sweetest,  holiest  Ideal  realized,  — the 
divine  beauty  incarnate,  — the  son  of  God.  To  draw 
men,  through  gazing  on  that  face,  into  assimilative 
sympathy  which  shall  transform  the  fallen  soul  into 
the  image  of  its  Maker,  is  the  great  aim  of  Christi- 
anity. 


134 


TEE  INCARNATION. 


The  restorative  forces  for  such  a soul  evidently 
must  be,  as  we  have  already  indicated,  from  without 
itself.  Once  admitting  sin  within  itself,  it  has  come 
within  a fatal  circle,  from  which,  left  to  itself,  it  will 
not  escape.  It  must  be  delivered  by  being  drawn 
into  sympathy  with  a purer  mind. 

No  theories  or  definitions  of  the  good,  the  beauti- 
ful, the  right  or  expedient,  suflice.  The  great  diffi- 
culty is  not  in  intellect,  but  soul ; not  to  define,  but 
to  induce  pursuit ; to  create  a loving  and  a choosing. 

" Video  meliora  jprohoque.  Deteriora  sequorf-^ 

“ I see  the  good,  and  I approve  it  too; 

I know  the  wrong,  and  yet  the  wrong  pursue,*’ — 

is  the  self-recorded  epitaph  of  the  most  brilliant  and 
illumined  intellects.  " The  good  I would,  I do  not ; 
the  evil  I would  not,  that  I do,”  pictures  the  malady. 
Nor  is  it  mere  choosing  that  makes  morality.  It  is 
the  motive  of  the  choice.  The  essence  of  virtue  is  the 
love  of  virtue  itself. 

This  love  is  kindled  in  vision  of  a person,  (not  a 
thesis  or  a philosophy  or  a paradigm^/  Life  comes 
from  life  ; from  the  action  of  soul  on  soul.  We  need 
that  mysterious  power,  — earlier  born  than  logic, 
swifter  than  induction,  irresolvable  by  analysis, 
occult  amidst  the  primal  and  ultimate  elements  of 
our  being,  which  we  call  sympathy,  — that  wondrous 
power  of  life  with  life,  assimilating,  through  inter- 
consciousness, souls  that  are  brought  into  commun- 
ion ; that  makes  us  grow  like  to  the  face  we  gaze  on  ; 
that  shapes  the  infant  countenance  to  the  mother’s 
smile,  with  almost  its  earliest  look  on  the  light. 


THE  INCARNATION, 


135 


By  this  influence,  this  extension  of  personality, 
the  Creator  transfigures  created  minds  to  his  own 
likeness,  and  binds  the  moral  universe  to  Himself. 
It  extends,  we  believe,  through  all  orders  of  being, 
a charm  from  the  eternal  mind  through  the  lowest 
rank  of  ascending  souls,  drawing  up  all  to  himself;  a 
chain,  fastening  all  to  his  throne  which,  being  sun- 
dered, the  bands  of  moral  order  would  break,  and 
the  moral  universe  sink  to  night  and  chaos. 

This  assimilative  power  of  sympathy  is  mightier  in 
proportion  to  the  greatness  and  glory  of  the  being 
into  inter-consciousness  with  which  the  soul  is  drawn. 
Evidently,  then,  it  is  mightiest  in  communion  with 
God.  Now,  whether  or  no  we  are  authorized  to 
predicate  that  no  less  force  could  arrest  the  fall  of  a 
soul  and  new-create  it,  it  is  clear  that  Christianity 
introduces  the  mightiest  power  in  the  universe  for 
that  purpose,  in  drawing  man  directly  into  sympathy 
with  the  divine  nature. 

But  to  secure  this  sympathy,  it  were  not  enough 
that  Christianity  revealed  to  us  simply  a personal 
God.  It  might  simply  disclose  almighty,  omniscient, 
and  eternal  justice  watching  over  a world  of  sin. 
The  mind  that  is  to  draw  me  into  sympathy,  must 
afiect  me,  not  only  with  a sense  of  its  purity,  beauty, 
and  grandeur,  but  also  of  its  kindness,  its  pity,^ 
placableness,  its  readiness  to  forgive  if  I have 
offended.  Terror  and  despair  freeze  up  all  sympa- 
thy. In  order  to  enter  into  sympathy  with  God,  I 
must  feel,  beyond  all  questionings,  God  loves  me, 
pities  me,  is  ready  to  forgive  me  on  repentance. 
Such  sentiment  must  therefore  be  disclosed  in  the 


136 


THE  INCARNATION. 


person  that  reveals  Him,  else  all  the  other  attributes 
that  should  attract  a sinless  being  will  repel  me  as  a 
sinner. 

I surely  need  not  pause  to  show  how  Christianity 
meets  these  requisitions ; how  the  advent  of  the  Son 
and  Revealer  of  God  was  inaugurated  with  the  angel- 
anthem  of  ” Peace  on  earth,  good  will  to  men  ” ; how 
the  gospel  opens  with  the  prelude,  ” God  so  loved  the 
worlds  that  He  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  who- 
soever believeth  in  Him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life  ” ; * how  ''  the  word  was  made  flesh,’’ 
and  dwelt  among  men  ''  full  of  grace  and  truth  ” ; how 
full  of  gentle,  loving,  and  healing  offices  his  earthly 
life  was,  to  all  classes  of  earth’s  sufferers ; how  on 
the  cross  He  poured  out  his  soul,  in  ” Father  forgive 
them,  for  they  know  not  what  they  do  ” ; and  how 
”He  who  was  the  brightness  of  Jehovah’s  glory,  and 
the  express  image  of  his  person,  after  He  had  him- 
self purged  our  sins,  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of 
the  Majesty  on  High,”  "where  He  ever  liveth  to  make 
intercession  for  us,^^ 

It  is  the  divine  love  that  draws  forth  human  love. 
" We  love  God  because  He  first  loved  us.” 

Again,  not  only  must  the  personage  in  which  God 
is  revealed  present  Him  placable,  loving,  and  forgiv- 
ing, but  also,  in  order  to  establish  full  and  most 
potent  sympathy  between  man  and  God,  he  must  be 
truly  a human  person  ; that  is,  he  must,  while  on  the 
one  hand  presenting^mmanent  in  himself  "the  ful- 
ness of  the  Godhead  bodily,”  so  that  the  words 
spoken  and  the  acts  performed  are  not  his,  but  those 


*John  3: 16. 


Tim  INCARNATION. 


137 


of  Him  who  sent  him,  so  that  "He  that  hath  seen 
Him  hath  seen  the  Father,”  in  order  that  in  dealing 
with  Him  men  may  feel  they  are  dealing  verily  with 
God,  — he  must  also,  at  the  same  time,  be  strictly 
and  truly  human  and  in  human  conditions. 

God  must  come  out  of  the  infinite  and  reveal  Him- 
self in  the  finite.  The  representative  personage  must 
be  presented  subject  to  liability  to  pain,  trial,  temp- 
tation, and  death,  like  others  of  human  mold ; else  I 
cannot  sympathize  because  I cannot  understand ; else 
the  being  is  incomprehensible  to  me,  is  entirely 
beyond  the  range  of  my  experience,  and  I can  know 
a person  only  by  the  interpretation  of  my  own  con- 
sciousness. A person  angelic,  impassive,  untempt- 
able,  is  not  the  revelation  I need.  The  mightiest 
factors  of  sympathy  certainly  were  wanting  in  such 
an  one  ; the  divinest  beauty  of  love  through  sufiering, 
and  of  forgiveness  through  dying,  were  impossible. 

Such  a Christ  could  not  have  borne  my  sicknesses 
or  sorrows,  or  suffered  on  the  cross  for  me.  Such  a 
Christ  I could  not  know,  and  therefore  I could  not 
know  God,  whom  I must  know  through  Him.  I 
must,  therefore,  fail  of  eternal  life ; for  the  idea  of 
eternal  life  without  assimilation  to  God,  is  the  most 
audacious  and  stupendous  of  absurdities.  But  con- 
formity to  God  can  be  wrought  only  by  sympathy 
with  God,  working  us  to  affection  and  moral  senti- 
ment kindred  to  His  own.  But  sympathy  must  be 
grounded  on  a conscious  community  or  similarity  of 
being.  Only,  by  being  like  God,  can  I know  God ; 
only  by  having  in  myself  a consciousness  and  experi- 
ence interpreting  the  attributes  predicated  of  God. 


138 


THE  INCARNATION. 


Such,  indeed,  is  the  law  of  all  the  knowledge  of 
things.  No  words  could  ever  explain  to  me  the 
import  of  beauty  or  love,  but  through  my  previous 
consciousness  of  these  emotions.  Language  is  a 
reminder  and  a revival,  not  a creator,  of  ideas.  So  I 
can  know  God  only  through  a consciousness  kindred 
to  his  own,  wrought  in  me  by  his  embracing  me  in 
his  sympathy ; and  this  knowledge  and  sympathy  can 
come  only  through  a revelation  in  a human  person, 
like  my  own. 

Philosophy  may  postulate  an  impassive  God.  Into 
the  awful  profound  opened  by  that  question,  I do  not 
enter.  I have  no  sounding  line  for  its  depths.  But 
this  is  clearly  written  on  my  own  nature ; the  being 
that  is  to  draw  me  into  sympathy  must  have  emo- 
tion ; the  mediator  through  whom  I am  to  be  drawn, 
the  person  who  is  to  represent  apd  reveal  God  to 
my  trust  and  love,  must  especially  the 

Christ  that  is  to  win  me  most  mightily  to  God,  that 
is  to  enter  most  profoundly  into  my  adoration,  my 
lov6,  my  sympathy,  must  approach  me  with  the 
divine  sweetness  of  love  shown  in  sacrifice.  The 
captain  of  my  salvation  must  "5e  made  perfect 
through  suffering.'” 

It  is  clear  that  the  idea  of  God  such  as  philosophy 
postulates,  as  cased  in  adamantine  order,  working 
only  by  inflexible  machinery  of  general  laws,  looking 
down  from  the  ever-silent  infinite  with  the  face  of  a 
Fate,  could  not  save  a world  like  ours.  A mind, 
over  whose  eternal  deep  no  new  emotion,  whether 
of  pain  or  pleasure,  of  indignation  or  love  or  pity, 
could  ever  ripple,  from  eternity  to  eternity ; that 


THE  INCARNATION. 


139 


looks  down  with  unchanged  feature  alike  on  a Judas 
or  a Christ,  a Borgia  or  a Howard ; such  a being  is 
beyond  my  sympathy,  beyond  my  prayer,  above  or 
beneath  me  by  the  breadth  of  a universe.  For  an 
assimilative  and  new-creative  sympathy,  humanity 
needs  a Heavenly  Father,  a brother  in  the  skies,  and 
to  feel  the  pulses  of  our  human  heart,  of  our  human 
pity  and  love,  beating  from  the  divine  breast.  J/ 

Finally,  amid  the  provision  for  moral  force  in  the 
Christian  system,  I point  to  one  which  is  coronal, 
and  which  effectuates  all  the  rest ; which  intensifies 
and  perpetuates  the  application  of  them  to  the  soul. 
I mean  the  condition  insisted  on  as  requisite  to  sal- 
vation,— FAITH.  This  is  no  arbitrary  requirement, 
as  is  sometimes  charged.  Its  necessity  lies  in  the 
very  nature  of  things,  the  nature  of  mind  and  of  sal- 
vation. It  is  the  necessary  means  to  the  intromission 
into  the  soul  of  the  transfiguring  beauty  of  God  that 
has  been  revealed  in  the  face  of  Christ.  Faith  is 
the  steadfast  gaze  of  the  soul  on  that  beauty,  a gaze 
intensified  by  trust  and  love,  an  immanent  sense  of 
inter-consciousness  with  the  divine  mind,  mighty  to 
change  the  soul  from  glory  to  glory,  in  the  likeness 
of  that  which  it  looks  upon. 

Faith  is  the  most  potent  applier  of  the  truths  of 
Christianity  to  minds,'  thejjlasp^^t  binds  the  human 
heart  to  that  of  the  Creator. 

Such  is  the  schenie  of  moral  forces  for  the  re- 
covery of  fallen  minds  which  Christianity  discloses, 
bound  up  in  the  revelation  of  God  in  a human  per- 
son. Such  the  fitness  of  that  wonderful  person  for 
the  office  required,  at  once  revealing  to  us  God  the 


140 


THE  INCARNATION. 


Father,  and  gathering  around  .that  revelation  thepro- 
foundest  sympathies  of  human  soids.  He  comes, 
who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  to  " show  us  the 
Father,”  " he  in  whom  dwelt  the  fulness  of  the  God- 
head bodily,  even  the  fulness  of  his  mercy  and  love, 
to  draw  us,  by  that  love,  into  a transforming  sym- 
pathy with  God. 

He  comes  from  out  the  infinite  to  meet  the  cry  of 
humanity  feeling  after  God,  — " O God,  Thou  hast 
made  us  for  Thee,  and  our  heart  cannot  be  quiet  till 
it  rests  in  Thee.”  He  comes  " who  is  the  brightness 
of  God’s  glory,  and  the  express  image  of  his  person,” 
to  show  us  in  himself  the  image  and  the  glory. 

Again : He  comes  as  a human  person,  a brother ; 

that  he  may  show  the  divine  beauty  set  in  humanity ; 
show  the  divine  love  through  suffering;  draw  me 
into  sympathy,  through  an  inter-consciousness  of 
temptation,  grief,  and  pain,  by  bearing  my  sicknesses 
and  sorrows,  going  before  me  through  the  death- 
shade,  and  by  presenting  that  face  in  which  shines 
the  ineffable  glory  shaded  for  my  sake  in  mortal 
agony,  and  stained  with  human  tears  : He,  in  whom 

the  infinite  is  revealed  in  the  finite  ; the  inapassible 
in  the  passible ; the  immortal  in  the  mortal. 

History  demonstrates  the  superiority  of  this 
scheme  as  a means  of  moral  restoration  and  renova- 
tion. First,  over  that  of  a revelation  of  God  in 
nature,  with  its  fixed  order  and  immutable  general 
laws,  as  in  case  of  the  ancient  heathen  world ; and 
secondly,  over  that  of  a revelation  of  God  by  signs 
and  wonders  interrupting  the  fixed  order  of  nature 
and  attesting  a verbal  characterization  of  God,  asso- 


THE  INCARNATION. 


141 


ciatecl  with  positive  law.  and  institute,  as  in  case  of 
the  Hebrews. 

Firsts  history  shows  the  impotency  of  a disclosure 
of  God  in  nature,  though  supplemented  and  modified 
by  that  in  the  consciousness  of  the  human  soul,  to 
create  or  conserve  the  moral  purity  of  nations,  or  of 
men.  Under  this  system  the  most  gifted  and  culti- 
vated races  of  the  ancient  world  — though  by  the 
force  of  our  human  nature  which  cries  out  for  a per- 
sonal God,  they  impersonated  general  laws  and 
abstract  qualities,  and  so  peopled  the  fixed  order 
of  nature  with  personal  deities — found  no  perma- 
nent moral  relief.  With  genius,  culture,  and  science, 
philosophy,  eloquence,  poesy,  political  sagacity,  and 
empire  ministrant  to  it,  — all,  on  a trial  of  ages, 
were  found  utterly  inadequate  to  heal  the  moral 
maladies  of  humanity,  or  stay  the  march  of  society 
to  the  most  foul  and  frightful  corruption. 

The  brilliancy  of  their  civilization  shows  speedily 
as  the  phosphorescence  of  decay,  the  intellectual  illu- 
mination only  making  the  darkness  visible,  of  a 
movement  it  could  not  arrest,  toward  moral  putres- 
cence and  social  dissolution.  The  Greek  in  the 
Macedonian  era,  and  the  Latin  under  the  Caesars, 
show  the  hopeless  failure  of  natural  religion  associ- 
ated with  the  most  rich  and  brilliant  culture,  as  a 
corrective  or  conservative  of  private  or  social  mo- 
rality. 

Secondly^  In  like  manner,  the  Hebrew  institute, 
with  God  manifesting  Himself  by  special  interven- 
tions amid  fixed  natural  laws,  and  by  the  inspired 
utterances  of  law-giver,  psalmist,  and  seer,  and 


142 


THE  INCARNATION. 


perpetuating  his  memorial  in  distinctive  social  insti- 
tutes and  religious  symbolism,  was  found,  after  ages 
of  trial,  incompetent  to  save  even  the  chosen  race 
from  moral  and  political  decay,  much  more  to  master 
and  renovate  the  world.  Save  as  a preparative  and 
educational  scheme,  it  was  a failure. 

But  when  in  Jesus  Christ  God  had  revealed  Him- 
self in  a human  person  and  a human  life,  a new  and 
wondrous  moral  power  is  clearly  recognized  by  his- 
tory, as  entering  the  circle  of  human  affairs.  The 
charm  of  a divine  beauty  touched  the  heart  of  the 
world.  A reformative  and  new-creative  energy 
pulsated  throughout  it,  from  the  depths  to  the 
heights. 

This  pulse  still  beats  down  the  centuries,  ever 
fresh  and  young.  The  outward  aspects  of  the  world 
have  changed  ; political  and  social  systems  have  come 
and  gone ; empires  and  civilizations  have  passed 
away ; but  the  vitalizing,  moral  impulse  then  com- 
municated is  still  undecayed  and  unconfined.  It  has 
been  entangled  and  hindered  by  many  alien  forces ; 
often  mixed  up  and  disguised  with  foreign  elements ; 
often  confounded  with  dogmas  that  have  grown  obso- 
lete ; with  modes  of  thought,  feeling,  and  action  that 
were  adscititious,  and  have  fallen  away  from  the 
substantive  essence ; but  the  moral  life-power  that 
entered  the  world  with  the  revelation  of  God  in 
Jesus  Christ,  still  lives,  and  still  energizes  more 
widely  and  more  mightily  in  more  human  interests 
and  human  souls  than  at  any  period  since  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ.  On  it  is  no  mold  of  age,  no  taint 
of  decay. 


THE  mCARNATIOIT. 


143 


Spite  of  perversions  and  misdirections  of  adverse 
philosophies  and  theosophies,  and  of  oppositions  of 
science  falsely  so  called,  it  has  waited  on  humanity 
in  all  its  progress,  and  become  more  thoroughly  and 
profoundly  incorporated  with  the  life  of  the  world, 
more  and  more  inwrought  into  the  organic  and  vital- 
izing forces  of  civilization. 

^ The  voice  that  inaugurated  it  eighteen  centuries 
ago  on  the  hills  of  Judea,  as  ushering  in  an  era  of 
peace  and  good  will  to  men,  has  since  expanded  on 
earth,  as  it  did  then  in  the  heavens,  to  the  psalm  of 
an  innumerable  host,  an  orchestral  symphony  of  ages 
and  nations,  richer  as  it  rolls  along,  with  new-born 
truths  and  sciences  and  charities  swelling  its  choral 
volume.  It  is  obvious  that  whatever  else  may 
become  merely  things  of  the  letter  and  pass  away, 
the  vision  of  the  personal  God  in  Christ,  with  its 
transfiguring  charm,  cannot  perish  from  humanity 
without  the  perishing  of  the  moral  structure  of  the 
modern  world.  yL. 

God’s  most  glorious  gifts  lose  appreciation  through 
{ wantage.  Their  value  comes  in  the  thought  of  their 
absence ; that  of  life  in  thought  of  death ; that  of 
the  sun  in  the  thought  it  is  never  more  to  rise.y  Sup- 
pose^  then,  the  fact  of  the  incarnation  were  blotted 
out  of  the  history  of  th^'world,  how  would  it  stand 
with  its  moral  forces  ? 

The  manifestation  of  God  in  Christ  vanishes  like 
a strange  dream.  The  ravishing  sweetness  of  divine 
love,  uttered  through  suffering,  is  become  a beautiful 
delirium.  Narazeth,  Capernaum,  Olivet  disappear 
from  the  scenery  of  history,  with  that  of  the  garden, 


144 


THE  INCARNATION. 


the  cross,  the  city  of  light  and  the  river  of  life.  The 
face  of  inelfable  love,  the'  celestial  effulgency  softened 
to  human  sympathy,  fades  from  the  sky.  The  day 
grows  dark  and  cold.  The  sun  draws  hack  his 
beams.  Curtains  of  solemn  and  mysterious  shadow 
fall.  Humanity  stands  again  under  a sky  of  eternal 
fixed  order  — alone  ! 

We  are  relegated  to  a God  disclosed  in  the  order 
of  nature  only.  This  is  all  our  lesson,  not  only  of  a 
God  of  force,  but  of  pity  and  love  All  things  run 
in  the  eternal  groove  of  law ; no  arrest,  no  turning 
aside,  no  remission,  no  relenting,  no  forgiveness. 
A cold,  impassive,  adamantine  order,  without  a 
flush  or  pulse  or  breath  of  life  from  eternity.  And 
behind  it,  what?  The  Infinite,  the  absolute,  the 
unknowable,  the  alone  1 This  is  all!  With  such 
names  man  looks  after  God.  But  who,  and  what, 
and  where  is  He  ? A force  ? a principle  ? a phan- 
tasm ? a conceit  ? Or  is  there  an  eternally  marble 
face  looking  down  on  us  through  these  skies  of  dreary 
order?  A God,  the  mere  operator  of  eternal  neces- 
sity ? Himself  meshed  in  his  own  laws  ? The  mere 
factor  of  inexorable  fate  ? 

What  moral  force  ? What  life  of  love  or  liberty 
or  hope  or  sympathy,  what  power  unto  repentance 
and  renewal  in  that  vision?  A universe  of  soulless 
force,  working  through  a system  of  infinite  mecha- 
nism in  the  lines  of  everlasting,  changeless  law, 
W'here  orbs  glorious  in  brightness  and  grandeur,  but 
voiceless  and  dead,  roll  on  in  never-ernng  orbits^ 
through  abysses  of  eterntd  silence  and^^hi!  1 
wander,  endlessly,  through  the  shining  waste;  I 


THE  INCARNATION. 


145 


shudder,  I freeze,  in  its  glittering  solitudes.  Its 
infinite  order  is  my  infinite  despair.  For  I look, 
I long  for  life ; for  a token,  a pulse  of  the  living 
God.  In  vain.  No  heart  beats  in  its  infinite  mecha- 
nism ; no  stir  of  life  on  its  illimitable  frozen  deeps  ; 
no  flush  of  love  in  the  desolate  splendors  of  its  arctic 
skies. 

— OT'if  upon  this  background  of  infinite,  lifeless 
order,  my  guilt  or  fancy  or  inference  from  self- 
consciousness  bodies  forth  a personal  deity,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  classic  nations,  what  is  He?  A 
power  of  justice,  whose  moral  laws  are  as  relentless 
as  those  of  nature,  and  thus  shut  out  all  sympathy 
as  they  do  all  hope  ? Or  is  He  like  myself,  the  vic- 
tim of  inexorable  law  ? Is  He  impassive  ? or  with 
passion  too  much  like  my  own,  who  may  by  frail 
example  allure  me  into  conflict  with  that  law,  but 
cannot  deliver  me  from  its  grasp  ? 

I ask  of  history.  She  f shows  me  the  heart  of 
humanity  ever  stirred  in  its  profoundest  conscious- 
ness with  the  feeling  of  a God, — its  instinct  of 
causality  applied  to  nature  and  to  itself,  compelling 
it  to  feel  after  a creator ; in  the  million,  at  least,  after 
a God  in  the  concrete,  embodied  and  personal,  and 
reflecting  its  own  self-consciousness. 

This  self-consciousness  I see  stronger  than  philoso- 
phy, with  its  God  cased  in  fate,  and  prisoned  in 
law,  and  spite  of  that  system  peopling  the  universe 
with  reflections  of  itself,  with  impersonations  of  sen- 
suous beauty  and  might  of  passion  and  lust. 

I see  it  crowding  the  heavens  with  myths,  chill 
cloud-forms,  beneath  which  humanity  is  congealed 


146 


THE  INCARNATION. 


into  art,  not  wanned  into  virtue ; or  with  tropic 
vapors,  baleful,  pestilential,  thunderous,  under  which 
it  grows  palsied  and  gangrenous,  or  feverous  and 
delirious.  Forms  sensual  and  seductive  allure  to 
voluptuous  sin,  or  those  malign  or  vengeful  brandish 
their  bolts  over  the  pale  nations,  while  they  crouch, 
cower,  and  rush,  swifter  and  more  desperate  to  per- 
dition. But  no  quickening  moral  power,  no  river  of 
life  flows  from  its  Olympus ; none  to  the  supersti- 
tious millions  who  believed,  much  less  to  the  sceptical 
philosophers  who  sneered  at  all  this  personnel  volup- 
tuous or  malign  as  only  mockeries  called  forth  by 
human  credulity  on  a background  of  eternal  necessity. 

Or  again,  in  quest  of  a power  of  moral  redemption, 
fly  we  to  a God  who  arrests  or  bends  the  fixed  order 
of  nature  at  the  behests  of  moral  law,  and  by  such 
interventions,  and  by  verbal  declaration  and  ordi- 
nance attested  by  them,  makes  enunciation  of  Him- 
self? I am  in  the  presence  of  the  Hebrew  insti- 
tute. I am  before  Sinai,  but  the  cloud  hides  Him. 
I am  at  the  temple ; the  Shekinah  veils  Him.  God, 
self-uttered  through  creation  and  law,  here  breaks 
through  the  fixed  order  of  nature  to  speak  to  me,  but 
his  face  is  hid.  I witness  his  tokens.  I see  "the 
brightness  of  his  skirts.”  I hear  the  voice  of  the 
passing  God.  Through  the  deft  in  nature,  the 
Infinite,  the  Incomprehensible,  the  Inefiable,  is 
glimpsed,  passing  before  me  with  the  proclamation  of 
his  moral  attributes,  " the  Lord,  the  Lord  God,  mer- 
ciful and  gracious,  long-suffering  and  abundant  in 
goodness  and  truth.  I hear  this  proclamation  borne 
down  the  ages  by  psalmists  and  prophet.  " But  lo  ! He 


THE  INCARNATION. 


147 


goeth  by,  and  I see  Him  not.  He  passeth  on  also, 
and  I perceive  Him  not.”  To  this  extent,  no  more, 
is  the  revelation  of  God.  We  have  simply  the  word 
UTTERED,  not  " the  WORD  MADE  FLESH.” 

We  have  a verbal  characterization,  the  self-decla- 
ration  of  God,  just,  merciful,  and  forgiving  to  the 
penitent.  But  the  mightiest  forces  to  induce  repent- 
ance are  wanting.  There  is  a sense  of  the  presence 
of  the  Infinite,  the  Incomprehensible,  the  Just  One. 
But  the  life-power  of  a revelation  in  a person,  the 
transforming  sympathy  of  an  inter-consciousness  with 
a human  person,  and  that  mightiest  of  all  moral  forces 
creative  of  spiritual  renewal,  the  eloquence  of  divine 


love  shown  through  suffering  — - these,  alas,  I find  not ! 
I find  no  sorrow-bearer,  no  sin-bearer,  no  Gethsem- 
ane,  no  cross,  no  ever-living  presence  of  a divine 
sympathizer,  a suffering  Eedeemer. 

With  many  beneficent  moral  issues,  quickening  the 
moral  sense  of  men,  and  presenting  the  norm  of 
perfect  righteousness  still  to  the  multitudes  cer- 
tainly little  capable  of  dealing  with  the  abstract  and 
the  purely  spiritual,  this  revelation  is  no  redemption. 
It  is  a disclosure  rather  than  cure  of  the  moral  malady 
of  man ; a creator  of  terror  more  than  of  sympathy. 
It  convicts  only,  not  converts.  It  shows  my  guilt 
and  summons  me  before  the  All- Just.  No  more. 

Suppose  it  clearly  offers  salvation  on  repentance. 
Kemorse  is  not  repentance.  Nor  is  fear  of  penalty, 
nor  are  right  convictions  of  the  good  and  true.  It  is 
turning  the  heart  earnestly  and  lovingly  to  Him  that 
is  the  ever  good  and  true.  But  the  mightiest  charm 
to  draw  me  thither,  fails.  The  light  of  the  glory  of 


148 


THE  INCARNATION. 


God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  radiance  of  divine 
love  shining  out  through  suffering,  is  quenched  for- 
ever! Salvation  on  repentance;  on  i^epentance! 
''  Ay,  there’s  the  rub,”  Repent  I What  can  one  do, 
when  one  cannot  repent  ? Be  drawn  into  sympathy 
with  God  I The  attributes  which  should  attract, 
repel,  affright  me,  conscious  of  guilt.  Tell  me  not 
of  his  holiness.  It  blasts  me  I Nor  of  his  justice. 
That  is  my  despair  ! His  omnipotence,  omniscience, 
omnipresence,  eternity,  they  make  the  universe  my 
dungeon.  No  flight  or  force  avails  me,  nor  the 
course  of  eternal  ages.  There  is  no  hiding-place 
even  in  the  shadow  of  death.  Tell  me  not  even  of 
his  love.  That  must  guard  virtue  and  vindicate  its 
law,  and  "be  it  love  or  hate,  to  me  alike  it  brings 
eternal  pain.” 

Sympathize  with  such  a God  I With  a power  that 
destroys  me  ? with  a throne  founded  on  my  grave  ? a 
Nemesis  that  hunts  me  down  eternity  ? with  the  glory 
and  beauty  of  a God  that  impends  over  me  like  the 
face  of  the  pitiless  Dis  ? As  well  sympathize  with  the 
glory  and  beauty  of  Niagara  as  it  bears  me  to  the 
fatal  plunge ; with  the  cruel  might  of  the  abysmal 
ocean ; with  the  earthquake  that  swallows  me  up ; 
with  the  lightning  that  strikes  me  dead. 

And  this,  the  all  of  our  revelation  of  God  ! of  our 
illumination  from  Heaven  ! A revelation  as  when  the 
red  right  hand  stretches  down  through  the  folding 
darkness  of  the  storm,  and  nature  shudders  beneath  ! 
The  illumination  of  a burning  world  lit  up  by  its  own 
fires  to  the  eternal  judgment ! Terror  and  despair 
freeze  up  all  sympathy.  A moral  God  is  disclosed, 


THE  INCARNATION. 


149 


but  for  me,  girt  round  with  consuming  cffulgcncy. 
A Heaven  is  shown,  but  to  me,  its  gates,  like  those 
of  our  lost  Eden, 

“ With  dreadful  faces  thronged,  and  fiery  arms.” 

I find  myself  under  a system  which  of  itself,  unless 
supplemented  by  some  further  revelation,  leaves  me 
with  no  moral  deliverance.  My  moral  nature  is  still 
cold  and  dead.  God  is  glorious,  and  the  universe  is 
beautiful.  But  I am  helpless,  hopeless,  lost.  I sink 
beneath  the  glory  and  the  beauty,  as  the  desperate 
swimmer  sinks  beneath  the  splendors  of  the  nightly 
skies  in  the  depths  of  ocean. 

But  now,  as  I look  around  in  the  very  crisis  of 
my  despair,  lo  ! the  heavens  are  open.  A wondrous 
person  descends  from  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  reveal- 
ing the  beauty  of  his  unspeakable  love  in  a human 
form,  that  wears  for  me  mortality,  and  suffers  and 
dies  for  me. 

As  I behold,  a new  spiritual  power  enfolds  me.  I 
find  myself  in  a new  universe.  New  life  beats  through 
my  whole  moral  being.  Divine  love  stooping  to  my 
nature,  and  proving  itself  through  suffering,  is 
mightier  than  my  guilt,  my  fear,  my  despair.  It 
subdues  me  to  repentance,  to  faith,  to  hope,  to  love. 
It  enravishes  me,  it  transforms  me.  Cloud  and  dark- 
ness pass  from  before  the  throne.  The  emerald  bow 
of  peace  engirds  it.  The  intolerable  brightness  is 
shaded  into  the  sweetness  of  human  sympathy.  Fiery 
cherub  and  flaming  sword  disappear.  Wide  flung 
are  the  gates  of  the  City  of  God.  Hands  that  were 
pierced  for  me,  hold  open  its  portals.  One  that  has 


150 


THE  INCARNATION. 


redeemed  me,  and  washed  me  from  my  sins  in  his 
own  blood,  that  cried  on  the  cross,  "Father  forgive,” 
bids  me  come  up  thither  — a saved  soul. 

I find,  moreover,  that  the  new  moral  life-power  I 
feel  within  me,  is  pulsating  through  millions  and 
through  ages.  I see,  at  the  very  crisis  when  history 
has  demonstrated  the  failure  of  both  schemes,  — those 
of  natural  religion,  or  of  mere  verbal  and  legal  reve- 
lation, in  the  most  favorable  circumstances  of  trial, 
— in  this  very  despair  of  the  world,  when  faith, 
virtue,  ahd  civilization  seem  in  hopeless  decay,  when 
was  least  to  he  expected  the  ingress  of  a new  moral 
power,  such  a power  is  manifested ; — a power  which 
works  on  through  the  eclipse  of  ancient  civilization, 
and  the  wreck  of  the  elder  world,  and,  extending  its 
living  impulse  through  centuries  of  barbaric  ruin  and 
spiritual  despotism,  has  become  the  vitalizing  and 
organic  element  of  modern  society ; a power  which 
was  never  more  youthful  and  potent  than  now ; never 
more  rapidly  extending  its  new-creating  force  through 
barbarous  races ; never  more  deepening  and  broaden- 
ing its  domain  in  the  intellect  and  heart  of  the  civil- 
ized world,  than  at  this  hour ; never  more  operative 
of  social  and  personal  reform  and  renovation ; never 
more  effective  for  the  removal  of  vice,  wretchedness, 
and  violence  within  nations,  or  the  establishment  of 
the  regimen  of  honor,  truth,  and  benevolence  be- 
tween them ; never  more  incorporate  with  the  forces 
of  progress,  the  life  of  civilization,  and  the  hopes  of 
humanity  for  its  most  illumined  future. 

To  what  can  histoiy  or  philosophy  trace  the  origin 
of  this  new  and  strange  moral  life-power  enteritig  the 


THE  INCARNATION, 


151 


world  at  such  a time  ? To  what  else  than  ''  the  word 
made  flesh  ” ? — the  revelation  of  God  in  a human 
person,  touching  the  world  with  a sense  of  Divine 
love,  breaking  up  its  sensuous  stupor  and  the  paral- 
ysis of  fear  and  despair,  and  throwing  over  it  the 
plastic,  assimilative  charm  of  a Divine  sympathy? 
This  seems  to  me  to  present  the  only -philosophical 
or  Jiistorical  solution  of  this  phenomenon.  Life  comes 
from  the  perpetual  appulse  of  ILe  life  of  God.  From 
out  the  desolate  infinite,  from  out  the  unapproachable 
glory  or  the  ” ever-during  cloud  and  dark,”  a face  of 
Divine  love  ineffable  has  looked  out  on  a fallen  race. 
" God  who  commanded  the  light  to  shine  out  of 
darkness,  hath  shined  in  our  hearts  to  give  the  light 
of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of 
Jesus  Christ.”  ^This  is  mj^  only  explanation  of  this 
wondrous  phenomeiipn.  Take  this  away,  and  the 
oracles  of  history  arij  philosophy  in  the  presence 
of  the  vastest  fact  of  thb  past  world  are  to  me  dumb. 


I 


7,. 


r 


V ■/"  j v--'V  t-A'--  f 

( \ j-  ■ , Li  i>  ^ ' 

< v/  ^ 


VI. 

THE  FOUKTH  GOSPEL,  — THE  EECOED  AND  TESTI- 
MONY  OF  THE  INNEE  LIFE  OF  ITS  AUTHOE.* 

BY  TIMOTHY  DWIGHT,  D.  D. 

Among  the  questions  respecting  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  which  may  be  regarded  as  having  been 
substantially  determined,  is  that  of  its  main  design. 
Whenever  and*  by  whomsoever  it  was  written,  it  was 
not  intended  to  be  a mere  narrative,  nor  a work 
like  the  earlier  or  Synoptical  Gospels.  Its  record 
of  the  life  of  Jesus  was  made,  not  for  its  own  sake 
alone,  — simply  to  tell  the  story  of  what  he  said 
and  did  and  suffered, — but  for  an  end  outside 
of  and  beyond  itself.  That  end  is  set  forth  in  the 

* In  this  lecture  the  author  purposely  turns  aside  from  what  are 
called  the  external  evidences  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
and  also  from  the  evidences  w;hich  are  derived  from  the  indications  of 
the  Apostle’s  personal  (as  we  may  say,  outivard)  presence  and  partici- 
pation in  the  scenes  which  he  describes,  and  limits  himself  to  a single 
line  of  thought,  having  reference  to  the  inner  life  of  the  writer  of  the 
Gospel  and  the  evidence  which  is  drawn  from  that  source.  He,  there- 
fore, in  some  comparatively  unimportant  points,  assumes,  as  already 
proved,  certain  things  which,  in  a more  general  discussion,  he  would 
have  felt  called  upon  to  establish  by  argument.  There  is'  no  case  of 
this  kind,  however,  as  he  believes,  where  the  assumption  is  at  all  essen- 
tial, either  to  the  main  conclusion  of  the  whole  discussion,  or  to  the 
particular  argument  in  connection  with  which  it  is  made.  In  the 
closing  pages, — towards  which  all  the  i:>receding  ones  are  made  to 
point, — he  calls  attention  to  the  argument  for  the  truth  of  Christianity, 
which  is  suggested  by  the  record  of  this  inner  life. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


153 


author’s  own  language,  in  the  closing  verses,  of  the 
twentieth  chapter,  as  being  the  production  of  faith  in 
Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God,  and,  thus,  the  opening  of 
the  way  of  spiritual  and  immortal  life  to  every  reader. 
It  is  possible,  indeed,  that  the  writer  may  have 
wished  to  add  to  the  statements  which  he  found  in 
the  other  histories ; or,  in  some  cases,  to  arrange 
the  events  in  a more  accurate  order.  Or,  again,  he 
may  have  had  in  view  the  errors  of  certain  heretics 
and  opposers,  and  may  have  desired  to  contradict  or 
disprove  them.  Some  have  discovered,  as  they  sup- 
posed, the  evidences  of  these  things.  We  do  not 
care  to  deny  the  force  of  the  arguments  which  they 
bring  forward.  The  writer,  however, — whatever 
may  be  said  upon  these  points, — was  not  a coptro- 
versialist  contending  against  other  opinions  than  his 
own,  as  if  engaged  in  a doctrinal  warfare ; nor  was 
he  one  who  merely  supplemented  the  deficiencies  of 
others,  or  told  a well-known  story  in  a somewhat 
better  form.  His  work  has  a tendency  and  aim 
which  is  manifest  from  the  beginning  to  the  end, — 
one  which  it  never  loses  sight  of, — one  to  which 
everything  else,  that  may  in  any  measure  characterize 
it,  is  altogether  subordinate, — the  one  which  has  just 
been  mentioned. 

Another  point,  which  I think  may  be  regarded  as 
sufficiently  settled,  is,  that,  whoever  the  author  was, 
or  at  whatever  time  he  lived,  he  had  some  reference, 
in  the  phraseology  of  what  is  called  his  prologue^  to 
the  philosophical  speculations  by  which  he  was  sur- 
rounded. That  the  origin  of  the  term  Logos  or  its 
associated  terms  is  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament 


154 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


maybe  denied  by  some, — that  they  came  from  the 
Greek  Philosophy  may  be  rejected  by  others, — while 
there  may  be  wide  variations  of  views  respecting  the 
progress  which  the  discussions  of  men  upon  these 
subjects  may  be  supposed  to  have  already  made 
before  the  writing  of  this  Gospel.  But  — without 
attempting,  or  considering  it  important  for  our  pres- 
ent purpose,  to  determine  the  right  one  among  these 
many  opinions — there  was,  we  may  be  sure,  a con- 
nection between  this  remarkable  introductory  passage 
and  the  discussions  of  the  time  and*  place  in  which 
the  author  lived.  The  people  around  him  — the 
educated  people,  at  least  — were  talking,  more  or 
less,  upon  these  subjects.  The  philosophical  lan- 
guage of  the  day  had  adopted,  to  some  extent,  these 
forms  of  expression,  and  this  writer  knew  them  as 
thus  adopted  and  employed. 

If,  now,  we  take  these  two  points  as  already 
established,  the  bearing  of  the  latter  upon  the  former 
is  such,  as  to  show  that  the  author,  in  carrying  out 
his  main  design,  was  endeavoring  to  prove,  not 
merely  that  Jesus  was  a revelation  of  God,  or  the 
revelation  of  God,  but  that  he  was  that  revelation 
of  God  which  his  contemporaries  were  blindly  dis- 
coursing of,  and  seeking  for.  He  was  the  Logos  in 
truth, — God  manifesting  himself  in  the  world.  If 
they  could  be  led  to  this  belief,  he  was  sure  that  all 
their  questionings  would  cease,  because  the  truth 
would  then  be  beaming  upon  them,  and  the  life  of 
the  soul,  which  their  searching  had"'  never  found, 
would  follow  in  the  line  of  faith. 

But,  even  when  we  have  gone  thus  far,  as  we  may. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


155 


under  the  guidance  of  past  investigation,  we  have 
not,  as  it  appears  to  me,  exhausted  all  that  can  be 
justly  said.  There  is  a third  point,  beyond  the  two 
already  mentioned,  to  which  I would  direct  especial 
thought,  on  the  present  occasion,  and  make  it  the 
starting-point  of  all  that  I have  to  urge.  This 
Gospel  bears  within  itself  the  evidence  that  its 
author,  who  either  was,  or,  in  the  work  which  he 
was  writing,  personated  the  Apostle  John,  designed 
to  give  his  narrative  the  appearance  of  having  a very 
peculiar  relation  to  that  Apostle’s  own  experience. 
I say,  a very  peculiar  relation^  and  by  this  I mean 
something  more  than  the  fact  that  he  was  an  eye- 
witness of  the  events  described,  or  lived  among  them. 
There  is  an  abundance  of  proofs  that  he  intended 
this  to  appear  to  be  the  case.  But  there  is  something 
more  than  this.  He  meant  to  have  his  story  appa- 
rently give  the  account  of  the  way  in  which  the  mew 
religious  life  of  the  apostle  originated,  and  developed 
itself  into  strength  and  perfectness.  His  definite 
aim  was,  that  his  readers  should  suppose  the  Apostle 
himself  to  be  telling  them  of  the  influences  which  had 
wrought  in  his  own  mind  the  belief  that  Jesus  was, 
indeed,  the  Divine  Logos. 

The  form  and  plan  and  method  of  his  work  were 
determined  carefully  on  every  side,  and  separated 
on  every  side  from  such  simple  narratives  as  the 
other  evansrelists  had  ^iven.  He  wrote  with  the 
great  purpose  of  establishing  a certain  truth.  The 
for7u  of  presentation  of  that  truth  — and,  so  far 
forth,  this  was  the  occasion  of  his  writing  as  he  did 
— was  due,  wholly  or  partially,  to  the  questionings 


156 


Tim  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


and  speculations  of  men  around  him.  The  mode  of 
proving  to  them  the  truth,  which  he  adopted,  was  not 
that  of  argumentation,  as  in  a doctrinal  controversy, 
hnt  that  of  relating  the  words  and  works  of  one  who 
fulfilled  the  truth  in  his  own  person,  and  with  whom 
he  had  himself  been  associated.  The  reason  for  Ms 
adopting  tMs  method  was  because  his  having  been  an 
eye  and  ear-witness  of  these  works  and  words  had 
convinced  his  own  mind,  and  so  he  thought  that  the 
record  of  what  he  had  known,  would  convince  others 
also.  And  thus  everything  comes,  in  the  last  result, 
from  his  own  personal  experience  of  the  truth  and 
of  faith  in  it.  In  other  words,  he  approaches  his 
fellow-countrymen  — who  were  asking  about  the 
Logos,  and  discussing  in  this  way  and  in  that  — with 
the  statement, — I have  seen  him,  who  is  the  Logos 
indeed.  Three  years  of  intimate  communion  with 
him  have  brought  to  my  mind  this  sure  conviction. 
Come  with  me  to  the  record  of  his  life.  Let  me 
guide  your  way  through  it,  as  I have  lived  my  way 
through  it,  from  its  beginning  to  its  ending.  Let 
me  tell  you  how  my  faith,  from  my  very  earliest 
interview  with  him,  grew  gradually  stronger  with 
every  new  manifestation  of  his  wonderful  character 
and  power,  until  it  rose  above  all  possibility  of 
doubting.  Let  me  open  it  before  you  till  you  have 
seen  it  all, — and  I am  sure  that,  if,  by  any  means, 
you  can  be  brought  to  appreciate  the  truth,  or  if  you 
have  within  you  any  real  susceptibility  to  the  truth, 
you  will  have  the  same  experience  that  I have  had ; 
you  will  believe  as  I have  believed. 

This  Gospel  loses  half  of  its  force  without  this 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


157 


last-mentioned  element ; and  its  author  well  knew 
that  it  would.  He  meant  that  it  should  appear  as  the 
Apostle^ s record  of  his  own  faith  ^ and  of  the  life  of 
Jesus  as  producing  and  continually  increasing  that 
faith.  Let  us  look  at  some  of  the  evidences  that  this 
is  so. 

I.  In  the  first  place,  we  notice  in  this.  Gospel,  in 
a very  remarkable  degree,  as  compared  with  the 
other  three,  a bringing  forward  into  prominence  of 
the  personality  of  its  professed  author,  the  Apostle. 
The  earlier  evangelists  give  suflS^cient  indications 
that  they  were  familiar  with  the  events  which  they 
narrate.  Matthew  was  an  actor  in  them.^  But 
neither  the  others  nor  even  he,  notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  their  histories  were  \^ritten  long  before  this 
one,  present  to  our  view  any  one  of  the  disciples  of 
Jifesus  as  the  beloved  disciple  is  here  presented.  He 
is  made  a kind  of  centre,  around  which,  at  one  stage 
of  the  history  after  another,  the  actions  gather  them- 
selves. The  story  begins  and  ends  with  the  record- 
ing of  impressions  produced  upon  his  mind.  The 
friendship  which  he  had  with  the  Master  is  pressed 
upon  the  reader’s  attention  again  and  again.  In  the 
intimate  association  of  the  twelve  with  Jesus  and 
with  one  another,  he  stands  out  conspicuous,  as 
comprehending  the  truth  more  deeply,  and  recogniz- 
ing the  Lord  more  fully.  And,  yet,  there  is  no  self- 
glorification  in  all  this.  There  is,  as  we  may  say,  no 
self-manifestation,  in  any  offensive  sense  of  the  word. 
The  prominence  which  he  gives  to  himself  is  even 

* See  note  on  the  first  page  of  this  lecture. 


158 


THE  FOURTH  GOSREL. 


more  peculiar  in  its  character,  than  in  its  degree. 
He  carefully  hides  his  name,  as  if  he  would  not  be 
discovered,  except  by  those  who  should  determine 
his  personality  through  gaining  from  the  story  the 
knowledge  of  his  character.  He  loses  himself  in 
his  testimony  to  his  Divine  teacher  as  truly  as  any 
of  the  other  writers, — as  truly,  even,  as  if  he  had 
been  the  humblest  and  most  unknown  of  that 
Teacher’s  followers.  Nay,  he  even  seems  to  kno^ 
nothing  but  Christ,  and  cares  for  nothing  beside,  if 
so  be  that  Christ  is  only  believed  in. 

Now,  how  can  we  account  for  this  double  or  two- 
sided  phenomenon,  as  we  may  call  it?  It  certainly 
is  not  in  accordance  with  the  character  of  one  who, 
as  the  opponents  of  this  Gospel  claim  with  regard  to 
its  author,  was  taking  up  the  labored  defence  of  some 
doctrine  which  had  developed  itself  after  the  time  of 
Christ.  The  defender  of  a theological  dogma  or  of  a 
school  could  not  have  written  in  this  way.  Indeed, 
on  the  theory  that  the  book  is  a theological  treatise, 
this  whole  matter  of  the  apostle’s  personality,  in  all 
its  striking  features,  is  altogether  inexplicable.  And 
just  in  proportion  as  we  bring  it,  in  our  conceptions, 
nearer  to  such  a treatise,  just  in  that  proportion  do 
we  involve  ourselves  in  difficulties  from  this  source. 
Nor,  again,  on  the  other  hand,  does  it  seem  like  the 
course  of  a man  who  merely  repeats,  in  his  old  age, 
the  stories  of  scenes  which  had  a deep  interest  for 
him  when  he  was  young,  or  gives  his  personal  testi- 
mony to  what  he  heard  when  in  the  midst  of  those 
scenes,  because  he  thinks  what  he  then  heard  of 
great  importance  to  mankind.  Had  this  been  all,  he 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


159 


might  have  done  either  of  the  two  things  which  we 
have  noticed.  He  might  have  made  himself  the  all- 
important  person  in  the  narrative,  or  he  might  have 
withdrawn  entirely  behind  the  events.  Under  such 
circumstances,  the  impulse  of  men  universally  is  to 
take  one  or  the  other  of  these  courses.  But  this 
author  combines  them  both,  or,  rather,  pursues  his 
pathway  between  them,  in  a manner  which  scarcely 
finds  a parallel  in  all  literature.  The  ordinary  expla- 
nation given  by  the  advocates  of  the  genuineness  of 
the  book,  though  containing  a part  of  the  truth,  will 
not,  then,  as  I am  persuaded,  meet  the  peculiar 
demands  of  the  case.  It  is  reasonable,  so  far  as  it 
reaches,  and  therefore  is  not  to  be  wholly  rejected 
like  that  proposed  by  its  opponents.  But  it  needs 
supplementing,  because  it  fails  to  give  us  complete 
satisfaction.  So  soon,  however,  as  we  recognize  the 
other  element  to  which  we  have  alluded,  and  find  its 
presence  in  the  author’s  mind  and  purpose  when  he 
writes,  the  difficulties  are  at  once  removed.  The 
most  remarkable  peculiarity  of  the  book,  which  dis- 
tinguishes it  from  all  the  other  writings  even  of  the 
apostolic  authors,  is  seen  to  have  a perfectly  natural 
basis  ; and  in  the  very  fitness  of  this  explanation  to 
make  all  things  plain,  is  the  first  evidence  of  its 
truth.  Adopting  it  as  the  truth,  we  say,  with  confi- 
dence, that  the  additional  force  which  the  author, 
speaking  in  the  person  of  the  apostle,  desired  to  give 
to  his  statements  through  the  introduction  of  himself 
into  the  narrative,  is  not  to  be  found  alone  in  his 
declaration,  ” He  who  saw  it  bare  record,”  but  in  that 
other  declaration,  " He  saw  and  believed.^^  The  half- 


160 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


concealment  of  his  personality,  even  where  he  puts 
it  forward  with  greatest  clearness,  was  not  simply 
because  he  shrank  from  notoriety  or  modestly  depre- 
ciated himself.  But  it  was  because,  if  he  could  only 
show  his  readers  how,  through  the  experience  of  the 
things  which  he  was  recording  for  their  perusal,  the 
character  of  that  disciple,  into  whose  heart  these 
things  had  entered  most  thoroughly,  had  been  trans- 
formed and  elevated  into  the  higher  life,  it  concerned 
him  not  at  all  that  they  should  know  his  name  or  who 
he  w^as,  except,  indeed,  so  far  as  he  was  the  disciple 
whom  Jesus  loved.  The  growth  of  his  faith  w^as 
everything  to  his  view,  because,  with  the  power  of  a 
living  illustration^  it  would  impress  the  truth  which 
he  had  to  proclaim  upon  the  hearts  of  those  for  whom' 
he  wrote.  The  continuance  of  the  knowledge  of 
himself,  on  the  other  hand,  was  nothing^  because  his 
every  thought  was  upon  the  truth  and  the  life  ; and, 
while  these  had  come  to  him,  they  had  not  come 
through  him,  but  through  the  Divine  Messenger  of 
whom  he  testified.  Why,  then,  should  he  not  have 
written  as  he  did?  How,  indeed  we  may  almost  say, 
could  he  have  written  otherwise  ? 

II.  In  the  second  place,  all  who  have  examined 
this  Gospel  with  care,  have  noticed  a marked  peculi- 
arity in  the  order  of  arrangement  of  the  narrative, 
and  in  the  principles  of  selection  which,  apparently, 
determined  the  author  in  his  choice  of  what  should 
be  inserted.  The  explanation  of  this  peculiarity  is, 
doubtless,  to  be  found,  primarily  and  mainly,  in  the 
fact  that  he  was  writing  a life  of  Jesus,  not  for  its 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


161 


own  sake,  but  for  the  purpose  of  proving  there! >y 
that  he  was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  This  being 
his  aim,  he  shapes  all  things  to  the  end  which  he  has 
in  view.  But  the  more  closely  we  look  into  the  mat- 
ter, the  more  must  we  observe  that  there  are  state- 
ments and  records  in  the  book,  the  ground  of  whose 
admission  cannot  be  brought  within  this  general  ex- 
planation. They  are  not  limited  to  any  one  place  or 
any  section  of  the  Gospel,  but  are  scattered  through- 
out its  whole  course,  appearing,  now  in  some  brief 
passage,  and  again  in  a more  formal  story,  but  all 
alike  having  refei’ence  to  the  apostle’s  own  inward 
experience.  At  the  very  outset  of  the  whole  history, 
for  example,  what  bearing  or  value,  as  related  to  the 
author’s  main  design,  has  that  simple  and  impressive 
record  of  the  apostle’s  interview  with  Jesus,  when 
Andrew  and  himself  first  passed  a few  hours  in  his 
company,*  and,  from  what  they  saw  of  him  in  that 
short  season,  first  came  to  the  conviction  that  he  was 
the  Messiah, — what  bearing  or  value  as  related  to 
the  author’s  main  design,  we  say,  has  this  record, 
except  as  it  tells  of  the  effect  produced  upon  the 
apostle’s  mind,  and  thus  gives  to  his  readers  the 
added  force  of  his  .own  awakened  faith  ? His  faith 
commenced  at  that  hour  and  under  those  influences, 
and  therefore  it  was  that,  with  that  hour,  he  began 
his  history. 

* John  1:  35-12.  That  John  is  the  person  alluded  to  in  connection 
with  Andrew  in  vs.  li,  but  not  mentioned  by  name,  I regard  as  suffi- 
ciently clear.  But  this  is  one  of  the  cases  referred  to  in  the  note  at  the 
beginning  of  this  lecture.  The  supposition  that  it  was  John  is  not 
essential  to  the  argument,  but  the  evidence  in  favor  of  that  supposition 
is  strong,  and  is  satisfactory  to  the  ablest  writers. 


1G2 


TEE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


Or,  again,  how  are  we  to  account  for  the  narrative 
of  the  miracle  at  the  wedding-feast  in  Cana  ?*  The 
placing  of  this  story  in  so  prominent  a position  in  the 
^ book,  or  even  its  introduction  at  all,  can  scarcely  fail 
to  arrest  the  attention  of  the  reader  and  excite  his 
surprise.  Indeed,  so  peculiar  is  the  scene  here  de- 
scribed, so  different  is  the  character  of  its  miracle  from 
all  the  others  of  Jesus’  history,  so  little  does  it  seem 
to  contribute  to  the  great  end  to  which  we  have 
alluded,  as  compared  with  a multitude  of  things  which 
might  have  been  inserted  in  the  space  it  occupies,  that 
here  has  been  a marked  point  of  contention  in  the  con- 
troversy about  this  Gospel : the  one  party  maintaining, 
with  earnestness,  that  such  a passage  cannot  have 
been  written  by  an  apostolic  author ; the  other  plainly 
recognizing  the  difficulties  which  it  presents.  We 
do  not  begin  to  escape  this  controversy,  as  I believe, 
we  do  not  reach  the  true  ground  of  the  performance 
of  this  miracle,  until  we  get  beyond  any  such  purpose 
as  the  mere  withdrawal  of  those  who  had  been  under 
John  the  Baptist’s  teaching  from  their  ascetic  views, 
or  the  proclamation  of  the  Divine  blessing  as  attend- 
ing upon  the  more  joyous  scenes  of  life.  These 
things  may  be  discoverable  in  the  story,  but  they  are 
subordinate  and  secondary.  The  principal  design 
was  another  than  these.  Jesus  had  just  received  into 
his  society,  for  a few  days,  by  accident  as  it  were, 
five  or  six  of  those  persons  who  were  afterwards  to 
be  chosen  as  his  apostles.  They  had  been  drawn 
towards  him,  in  their  affections  and  confidence,  by 
what  they  had  seen  of  his  character  in  this  brief 


»Johu  2:  1-11. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


1G3 


period.  But,  in  order  to  the  securing  these  results  as 
the  foundation  of  a permanent  life^  it  was  necessary 
that  some  miraculous  proof  of  his  divine  commission 
should  be  given  them  at  this  early  time.  Nothing,* 
however,  was  more  remote  from  the  custom  of  Jesus 
than  the  seeking  after,  or  going  out  of  his  way  to 
find,  opportunities  for  the  display  of  his  power.  Ho 
always  took  advantage  of  the  opportunity  which 
offered.  His  miracles  found  their  place  naturally  in 
the  order  of  his  life.  They  manifested  themselves 
just  when  and  where  some  human  want  or  necessity 
called  for  them.  Such  a need  became  known,  in  this 
case,  in  the  midst  of  the  feast  to  which  they  had 
directed  their  course.  It  was  a providential  happen- 
ing. It  was  the  first  one  that  presented  itself.  It 
was  the  one,  therefore,  which  he  must  avail  himself 
of  to  accomplish  the  object  which,  at  this  moment, 
was  of  more  importance  to  him  than  all  others.  He 
availed  himself  of  it,  and  the  result  followed.  These 
men  — although  they  separated  from  him,  probably, 
after  a few  days  more  — had  been  so  strengthened  in 
their  faith  in  him  by  this  exhibition  of  his  superhu- 
man power,  that  they  were  ready,  when  the  divinely 
appointed  hour  arrived,  to  follow  his  call  to  the 
Apostolic  office,  though  it  involved  the  leaving  their 
occupations  and  their  homes  at  a moment’s  notice. 
''This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus  in  Cana  of 
Galilee,  and  manifested  forth  his  glory ; and  his 
disciples  believed  on  himJ^  This  is  the  simple  state- 
ment which  the  author,  speaking  in  the  name  of 
John,  makes  at  the  close  of  the  story,  and  in  this 
simple  statement  is  the  reason  of  the  miracle ^ — that 


1G4 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


reason  which  underlies  all  others,  and  without  which 
it  would  never  have  been  performed.  But,  if  this  is 
the  true  account  of  the  scene,  its  introduction  at  just 
this  point  of  the  narrative,  following  so  immediately 
upon  the  interview  of  this  Apostle  with  Jesus  to 
which  we  have  already  referred,  can  scarcely  fail  to 
point  us  to  the  effect  of  this  miracle  upon  his  own  faith 
as  the  occasion  of  his  recording  the  scene  so  care- 
fully. He  was  himself  that  one  among  the  little 
company,  the  establishing  of  whose  belief  on  a 
stronger  foundation,  at  this  time  and  by  this  event, 
he  realized  most  fully;  and,  as  the  recollection  of 
the  scene  was  vivid  in  his  own  mind  for  this  reason, 
so,  for  this  reason  also,  he  gives  it  to  others,  that  that 
which  had  affected  him  might  affect  them  likewise. 

Or,  again,  if  we  look  at  the  end  of  the  history, 
where  the  account  of  the  resurrection  is  presented, 
what  can  we  say  of  the  life-like  story  of  the  visit  of 
this  apostle  and  Peter  to  the  sepulchre,  on  that  first 
Sunday  morning?^  The  narrative  in  all  its  minute 
points  — this  is  more  clear  the  more  we  examine 
them — bears  almost  irresistible  evidence  thp-t  the 
scene  which  it  portrays  was  not  a creation  of  the 
author’s  fancy,  but  that  the  Apostle  was  actually  a 
participator  in  it.  But,  even  here,  we  do  not  find  in 
his  personal  testimony  to  the  great  event  of  Christ’s 
rising  from  the  dead  the  full  and  satisfactory  account 
of  the  insertion  of  this  story.  That  he  had  himself 
been  led,  by  what  he  saw  at  that  moment,  to  believe 
that  his  Master  had  risen, — that  he  had,  thus,  tahen 
one  more  step  in  the  progress  of  his  faiths  and  by  this 


* John  20:3-9. 


TUE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


165 


step  was  prepared  to  understand,  soon  afterward, 
that,  in  the  resurrection  of  his  Master,  the  seal  had 
been  put  upon  His  divine  mission,  herein  lay  the 
deepest  interest  of  the  scene  as  he  recalled  it.  This 
is  the  most  natural  explanation  of  the  story,  as  we 
first  ask  for  the  reason  of  its  insertion ; and,  as  we 
look  into  it  more  closely,  we  cannot  doubt  that  it  is 
the  true  one,  because  tl\Q  fact  of  the  Apostle’s  belief 
and  the  precise  measure  and  limits  of  it  are  so  care- 
fully set  forth.  The  story  is  made,  as  it  were,  to 
bear  towards  and  terminate  in  the  statement  of  these 
things.^ 

Or,  again,  let  us  examine  the  order  and  progress 
of  the  whole  history,  and  the  same  explanation  will 
suggest  itself.  We  have  here  two  facts  to  notice. 
One  of  them  is  this  frequent  breaking  out  of  the 
apostle’s  own  participation  in  the  events,  and  the 
effect  of  it  upon  himself.  The  other  is  the  steady 
progress,  in  the  main  plot  and  plan  of  the  work, 
towards  its  doctrinal  end.  The  latter  must  be  har- 
monized with  the  former.  The  explanation  which 
we  give  must  run  its  course  through  the  two  things, 
as  they  are  mingled  and  intertwined  throughout  the 
history.  If  we  account  for  one  of  them  only,  we 
have  done  but  half  of  our  work.  But  if  we  try  to 
explain  them  both  together,  there  is  no  other  way 
that  opens  to  us  so  naturally  as  this  which  we  have 
suggested.  May  we  not  go  further  still,  and  say  that 
there  is  no  other  way  at  all?  If  the  apostle,  or  the 
author  personating  him,  proposed  to  himself  to  prove 
to  his  readers  that  the  person  whom  he  had  known 


* John  20: 8-9. 


166 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


was  the  Logos,  — if  he,  also,  proposed  to  prove  this 
by  narrating  the  life  and  words  of  this  person,  — and 
if  he  further  proposed,  in  presenting  the  life  for  this 
purpose,  so  to  narrate  it  as,  by  setting  forth  how  it 
had  gradually  wrought  out  the  proof  to  his  own 
mind,  to  give  it  the  most  suitable  form  for  impress- 
ing other  minds, — then  everything  becomes  clear. 
The  selection  of  the  events  and  teachings  in  such  a 
way  as  to  make  the  power  and  character  and  divinity 
of  Christ  appear  more  fully  as  the  story  goes  for- 
ward ; the  bringing  out  of  the  discourses  so  much 
more  than  the  miracles, — just  the  things  which  were 
peculiarly  calculated  to  impress  a mind  like  his  ; the 
omission  of  so  many  things  recorded  in  the  other 
Gospels,  when  similar  things,  occurring  at  other 
times,  exhibit  the  same  power  or  attribute  -in  the  due 
order  of  impressiveness, — as,  for  example,  the  inser- 
tion of  the  remarkable  case  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus 
and  its  location  in  the  narrative,  while  the  other 
miracles  of  calling  the  dead  to  life  are  not  referred 
to ; the  very  fundamental  division  of  the  book  into 
its  two  leading  parts,  carrying  the  reader,  first 
through  the  record  of  what  Jesus  made  known  of 
himself  to  the  unbelieving  Jews,  and  afterwards, 
through  those  more  tender  and  richer  unfoldings  of 
the  truth  in  his  discourses  with  his  chosen  friends, — 
the  more  outward  part  of  the  history,  as  we  may  cal  I 
it,  leading  towards  and  preparing  for  the  more  in- 
ward part;  all  these  peculiarities  of  the  book  are 
seen,  at  once,  to  have  a more  perfect  fitness  and  a 
fuller  explanation,  when  we  see  the  whole  plan,  as  it 
were,  under  the  guidance  of  the  apostle’s  own  in- 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


167 


creasing  faith.  The  other  evangelists  simply  told  the 
story  of  the  things  that  happened,  in  their  order,  for 
they  were  recording  only  what  they  had  seen  or  been 
familiar  with.  This  apostle,  on  the  other  hand,  was 
giving  the  narrative  of  what  he  had  felt,  and,  there- 
fore, he  followed  the  course  of  his  holy  feeling  and 
inner  life  even  to  the  end.  In  the  veiy  progress  of 
the  record,  therefore,  he  presents  the  constant  deep-- 
ening  of  the  impression  and  the  due  order  of  the 
proofs. 

III.  In  the  third  place,  we  are  led  to  the  same 
explanation  of  the  Gospel  as  we  notice  the  repeated 
emphatic  and  distinct  statements  respecting  himself 
and  his  companions,  that  they  believed.  We  cannot 
doubt  that  the  apostles  did  actually  believe,  in  a 
higher  degree,  at  the  crucifixion  and  the  resurrection, 
than  they  had  done  three  years  before.  If  anything 
would  seem  to  be  manifest  with  reference  to  them,  it 
is  that  there  must  have  been  a steady  growth  as  the 
time  passed  on.  It  was  like  the  child’s  faith  at  the 
outset,  as  compared  with  the  mature  man’s  faith  at 
the  end.  Now,  the  author  describes  their  faith  at 
every  point  in  the  progress,  by  the  same  word,  be- 
cause it  was,  in  its  essential  character,  the  same  thing 
always.  But  the  word  must  gain  a deeper  meaning 
at  each  new  stage,  and  gather  into  itself  the  added 
force  which  the  newly-witnessed  evidences  of  divine 
power  and  truth  had  given  it.  It  must  enlarge  in 
significance  just  as  the  history  advances.  With  every 
repetition  it  must  be  more  than  it  was  before.  The 
student  of  this  Gospel  cannot  fail  to  appreciate  this 


168 


TSE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


fact  as  he  follows  its  course  from  chapter  to  chapter.* 
The  disciples  believed,  when  they  first  saw  Jesus ; 
they  believed,  as  they  witnessed  his  first  miracle ; 
they  believed,  on  the  day  following  the  feeding  of  the 
five  thousand,  when  the  remarkable  words  which  set 
forth  the  mysterious  union  of  Christ  with  his  friends 
had  just  been  heard ; they  believed,  as  the  last  utter- 
ance of  love,  at  the  supper,  faded  into  the  prayer 
of  intercession : they  believed,  as  their  Master  rose 
from  the  dead ; this  disciple,  who  was  the  most  open 
to  faith  among  them,  believed,  when  he  saw  the 
vacant  sepulchre;  Thomas,  who  was  the  most  ready 
to  doubt,  believed,  when  he  beheld  the  print  of  the 
nails  and  was  pointed  by  Jesus  to  his  wounded  side. 
This  doubting  one  of  the  company  had  risen  now,  at 
the  latest  moment,  above  the  highest  reach  of  even 
John’s  own  confidence  at  the  beginning.  But  the 
very  fulness  of  the  declaration  of  his  faith,  at  this 
moment,  is  a testimony  of  the  growth  and  greatness 
which  must  now  have  characterized  the  faith  of  all 
his  companions.  The  measnre  of  his  belief  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  this  beloved  disciple,^  indeed,  may 
be  indicated  by  the  verses  which  describe  the  two, 
and  set  forth  the  proofs  already  mentioned,  that  were 
needed  to  convince  them. 

In  the  same  connection,  our  thought  may  be 
directed  to  those  passages,  in  which  the  author,  in 
the  person  of  this  Apostle,  says  of  himself  and  his 

*John  1 ; 42-45.  The  language  here,  “We  have  found  the  Messias/* 
is  substantially y though  not  precisely,  that  of  the  other  passages  which 
are  referred  to.  John  2: 11;  6:  69;  16:  30;  20:  8;  20:  29. 

t John  20: 8-9  comp,  with  20:  24-29. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


169 


associates,  that,  with  reference  to  certain  things,  they 
believed  only  after  Jesus  had  risen  from  the  dead. 
What  is  the  intimation  of  these  passages,  when 
interpreted  in  union  with  the  others  to  which  we 
have  referred,  unless  it  be  this, — that  their  faith 
was  a progressive  thing,  that  it  had  reached  out  to 
the  attainment  of  much,  and  was  still  reaching  out 
for  more  ? And  how  do  we  account  for  the  intro- 
duction of  this  singular  phrase  again  and  again,  after 
we  have  discovered  what  it  indicates,  except  as  we 
believe  that  the  Apostle  draws  it  forth  from  his  own 
experience  ? 

I cannot  but  remark,  also,  that,  while  this  author 
never  uses  the  word  faiths  he  employs  the^erS  which 
expresses  the  idea  of  believing^  and  which,  in  so 
many  instances,  records  the  fact  that  one  and  another 
actually  believed,  almost  three  times  as  frequently  as 
all  the  other  evangelists  together,*  and  almost  as 
many  times  as  the  whole  body  of  authors  whose 
writings  follow  his  own,  even  to  the  end  of  the  New 
Testament.  This  very  peculiarity  in  his  language  — 
as  striking  as  any  other  that  can  be  discovered  — in 
itself  suggests,  that  it  was  the  activity  of  faith, 
growing  experience,  enlarging  apprehension  of  the 
things  of  Christ,  which  occupied  his  thoughts, — not 
a mere  dogma,  not  a mere  testimony,  but  a life. 
And,  when  We  join  this  suggestion  to  the  preceding 
ones,  we  see  how  naturally  his  fondness  for  this  active 

* The  verb  occurs  ninety-eight  times  in  this  Gospel ; thirty-five 
times  in  the  other  three  Gospels  ; and  one  hundred  and  three  times  in 
the  remaining  hooks  of  the  New  Testament,  exclusive  of  the  first 
Epistle  of  John. 


170 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


and  living  word  may  Lave  come  from  the  depths  of 
his  own  life,  and,  thus,  all  the  record  of  believing, 
which  is  so  constant  in  his  narrative,  may  have  been 
due  to  the  delightful  recollections  of  his  personal 
progress  which  seemed  to  be  pictured  anew  before 
his  mind  in  the  progress  of  every  other  believer. 

IV.  There  are  also,  in  the  fourth  place,  brief 
narratives  in  this  Gospel,  and  even  sentences  in  the 
discourses  of  Jesus  as  given  by  it,  which,  though 
they  have  no  direct  connection  with  any  record  of 
the  Apostle’s  growing  faith,  yet  lose  a large  portion 
of  their  significance  apart  from  it.  I can  only  allude 
to  one  or  two  examples,  which  the  reader  of  the 
book  can  multiply  for  himself.  The  little  story, 
thrown  into  the  midst  of  the  crucifixion  scene,  where 
Jesus  commits  his  mother  to  the  care  of  John,  is  one 
of  these.*  This  story,  certainly,  has  no  relation  to 
the  main  truth  which  the  author  was  aiming  to  pre- 
sent. It  has  only  the  slightest  connection,  if  indeed 
it  has  any  at  all,  with  his  personal  testimony  to  the 
death  or  the  divinity  of  Christ.  It  has,  we  may  add, 
no  manifest  and  immediate  bearing,  to  the  view  of 
the  ordinary  reader,  upon  the  development  of  John’s 
religious  history.  But,  as  we  look  more  deeply  into 
it,  and  inquire  how  it  came  to  be  introduced  into  the 
narrative ; as  we  notice  its  contrast  with  the  record 
of  the  soldiers’ heartless  conduct,  that  precedes  it, 
and  its  immediate  union  with  the  picture  of  the 
dying  moments  of  Jesus,  which  follows  it  in  the 
succeeding  verses,  — we  may  see  that  it  has  a point- 


* John  19:  25-27. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


171 


ing  toward  that  development.  The  ground  of  the 
action,  on  the  part  of  Jesus,  at  this  time,  has  been 
a subject  of  inquiry  and  discussion.  He  leaves  his 
mother,  not  in  the  care  of  her  own  children  or  near 
relatives,  but  in  the  charge  of  this  disciple.  What 
account  are  we  to  give  of  so  unwonted  a thing  in 
human  experience  ? The  first  reason  which  suggests 
itself,  and  the  only  one  which  can  lie  at  the  founda- 
tion of  an  explanation,  is,  that  this  disciple  was  a 
believer,  while  the  members  of  her  family  were  not. 
In  the  time  of  his  separation  from  them,  Jesus  wished 
that  the  faithful  ones  should  be  associated  together, 
and  should  care  for  one  another.  The  one  among 
them  who  needed  the  most  of  sympathy  and  help  ' 
should  not  be  left  to  those  who  were  strangers  to  the 
faith,  even  though  they  might  be  in  the  most  intimate 
circle  of  earthly  relationship.  But  while  we  admit 
the  full  weight  which  can,  by  any  possibility,  be 
given  to  this  reason,  we  must  remember  that  these 
brethren  of  Jesus  were  to  become  believers  in  a few 
days  after  his  death.  He  was  to  appear  to  James 
even  within  the  week  following  his  resurrection,'^^ 
and  this  one  of  his  family  was  to  become  so  earnest 
and  prominent  a disciple,  as,  afterwards,  to  assume 
a leadership  in  the  Church.  The  others,  also,  were 
to  be  the  associates  of  the  Apostles  and  the  friendly 
women,  and  of  Mary  herself,  at  the  meeting  which 

* That  the  appearance  to  James,  the  Lord’s  brother,  was  within  the 
first  week,  appears  probable  to  me  from  I Cor.  15:7,  as  compared  with 
the  accounts  in  the  Gospels  and  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
of  the  appearances  of  our  Lord  after  his  resurrection.  The  precise 
time,  or  even  the  fact,  of  a special  appearance  to  J ames,  is  not  impor- 
tant, however,  to  the  main  point  urged  in  the  text. 


172 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


immediately  followed  the  ascension.  It  would  have 
been  but  a brief  season,  had  he  left  his  mother  with 
these  brethren,  before  she  would  have  found  them 
bound  to  her  in  Christian  affection  as  truly  as  in 
family  love.  Why  this  singular  provision  for  her, 
then,  unless  it  had,  also,  some  deeper  meaning?  It 
had  such  a meaning.  The  hour  was  a most  peculiar 
one.  It  was  a time  when  Jesus  seems  to  have  risen 
above  all  human  relationships,  and  to  have  fixed  his 
thought  only  on  the  higher  union  with  himself.  Here 
stood  before  him,  on  the  one  hand,  the  woman  whom 
he  loved  beyond  all  others, — the  one  who  had  seen 
something  of  his  glory  first  of  all,  — the  one  who 
was  now  watching  his  approaching  death  with  the 
tenderest  feeling,  and  the  most  sorrowful  outlook  for 
herself  upon  the  future.  Here  stood,  upon  the  other 
hand,  that  one  among  his  disciples  who,  through  the 
growth  of  his  faith  and  inner  life  during  the  years  of 
their  association,  had  come  to  be  most  nearly  like 
himself.  It  was  not  strange,  surely,  in  the  circum- 
stances of  the  hour,  that,  with  the  sole  thought  of 
the  bond  connecting  him  so  closely  to  them  both,  he 
gave  the  one  of  them  to  the  other  for  their  future 
life.  But  the  gift  implied  the  growth  of  which  we 
have  spoken,  and  the  story  of  it  tells  us  not  only 
of  what  was  done  in  that  moment but  also  of  the 
progress  of  the  months  and  years  before  it.  Explain 
it  as  thus  pointing,  though  indirectly,  to  the  Apostle’s 
past  experience,  and  the  insertion  of  the  story  seems 
like  a thankful  expression  of  his  faith,  as  he  stands 
beneath  the  cross.  Endeavor  to  account  for  it  without 
this,  and,  though  the  record  of  a touching  scene,  it 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


173 


docs  not  so  naturally  and  completely  take  its  place 
within  the  plan  of  the  Gospel. 

Or,  as  another  illustration  of  the  point  which  we 
have  now  in  mind,  let  us  look  at  one  of  the  discourses 
of  Jesus.  There  is  no  more  striking  expression  of 
the  Lord  recorded  by  this  author,  as  it  seems  to  me, 
than  the  one  which  we  find  in  connection  with  his 
promise  to  the  disciples,  on  the  last  night  of  his  life, 
that  they  should  meet  him  again  in  heaven.  '^In  my 
Father’s  house  are  many  mansions,”  he  says  ; ''  if  it 
were  not  so,  I would  have  told  you  This  last  brief 
sentence,  standing  as  it  does  after  the  assurance 
which  precedes  it,  has  been  cited  as  forceless  or 
meaningless  ; and  it  is  so,  when  considered  as  a mere 
declaration.  It  adds  nothing  to  the  positive  state- 
ment. It  is  only  a negative  repetition.  Had  it  been 
uttered  by  an  ordinary  man,  we  should  have  placed 
no  greater  reliance  upon  his  assertion  because  of  it. 

Had  it  been  uttered  even  by  Jesus,  when  this  disciple 
and  his  five  associates  were  journeying  in  his  company 
toward  Cana,  three  years  before,  it  would  have 
seemed  almost  like  an  idle  word.  But,  when  we 
remember  all  that  had  passed  since  then,  — when  we 
see  that  John,  even  more  than  the  others,  had 
advanced  in  his  faith  toward  the  full  comprehension 
of  w^hat  Jesus  was,  — how  differently  it  appears  to 
us  ! So  far  from  being  meaningless  now,  it  gathers 
within  itself  all  the  force  which  the  apostle’s  confi- 
dence in  him  could  give  it,  — -a  confidence  which  / 
had  become  stronger  with  the  seeing  of  every  mirac- 
ulous work  and  the  hearing  of  every  miraculous 


* John  14:  2. 


174 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


word.  It  was,  now,  the  testimony  of  the  love  of  a 
friend,  whose  affection  and  whose  knowledge  had 
been  thoroughly  tried.  It  Avas,  thus,  far  more  than 
any  positive  announcement  of  a truth.  Such  an 
announcement  might  be  doubted  in  a moment  of 
weakness  or  of  darkness,  but  this  testimony  never. 
Nay,  even,  it  grew  weightier  and  more  full  of  conso- 
lation, the  deeper  the  trial  and  uncertainty  into  which 
the  soul  might  be  cast.  It  said  to  the  soul,  in  such 
an  hour,  you  may  believe  the  truth  which  I open  to 
you  — that  there  is  to  be  a heavenly  life  and  a 
heavenly  meeting — on  the  best  of  all  evidence,  for, 
if  it  were  not  so,  I,  whose  friendship  you  now  know 
so  well,  would  surely  have  told  you.  But,  as  the 
words  have  no  significance  apart  from  the  experience, 
their  presence  where  they  are  bears  witness  that  the 
experience  had  been  a reality.  And  when  the  author 
records  them  among  these  last  words  of  Jesus  to  the 
disciples,  he  assures  us  that  the  Apostlds  inner  his- 
tory, as  well  as  the  history  of  his  Master,  was  a 
matter  of  chief  importance  in  the  plan  of  his  work. 
These  incidental  statements  and  expressions,  then,  so 
numerous  if  we  could  only  cite  them,  point  to  the 
same  conclusion  to  which  the  other  suggestions, 
already  presented,  had  combined  to  lead  us. 

V.  I add  only,  in  the  fifth  place,  as  bearing  to  the 
same  end,  a brief  reference  to  the  inwardness,  if  I 
may  so  call  it,  which  characterizes  the  entire  thought 
and  style  of  this  Gospel.  The  history  of  the  book, 
as  it  has  come  down  to  us  through  the  ages,  has 
strikingly  exhibited  its  two  peculiarities.  No  portion 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


175 


of  tlie  New  Testament  has  been  a subject  of  more 
earnest  theological  discussion.  It  has  suggested  defi- 
nitions, and  awakened  controversy,  and  divided 
schools,  to  so  great  a degree,  that  one  is  almost  led, 
when  observing  this  side  of  its  history  alone,  to 
believe  it  to  have  been  intended  only  to  set  forth  the 
formularies  of  doctrine.  But  when  we  enter  into  the 
interior  life  of  the  Church,  and  penetrate  beneath  the 
warring  opinions  of  hostile  parties,  we  find  in  all 
alike  the  deep  conviction,  that  in  this  Gospel  there  is 
more  which  enriches  the  soul,  and  more  which  appeals 
to  the  believer’s  inward  experience,  than  in  all  the 
rest  of  the  Apostolic  writings.  The^most  cultivated 
Christian  heart  never  exhausts  the  fulness  of  what  it 
ofiers  to  its  life,  any  more  than  the  most  enlightened 
Christian  mind  comprehends,  to  the  utmost,  the 
mystery  of  its  great  doctrine. 

This,  surely,  is  no  insignificant  fact,  which  asks 
not  for  an  explanation  It  is  the  leading  fact  which 
presses  itself  upon  our  notice.  It  must  have  a 
ground  and  a meaning.  The  reason  that  this  Gospel 
has  awakened  doctrinal  inquiry  and  discussion  is 
because  it  was  written  to  prove  that  Jesus  was  the 
Logos.  Just  as  truly  and  just  as  unquestionably  may 
we  say,  that  it  has  affected  the  imier  life  of  all  Chris- 
tians, because  it  was  written  as  a setting  forth  of  the 
Apostle’s  own  inner  experience.  The  truth  was  to  be 
established  by  the  narrative  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  The 
form  in  which  that  narrative  was  to  be  made  to 
move  forward  to  the  establishment  of  the  truth,  was 
to  be  determined  by  the  way  in  which  that  life  had 
affected  himself.  The  whole  record  of  events  and 


176 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


words,  and  everything  both  great  and  small,  was  to 
be  under  the  direction  of  this  twofold  ruling  purpose. 
This  was  the  author’s  plan,  and  because  it  was  so,  and 
only  for  this  reason,  the  history  of  his  Gospel  has 
been,  from  the  beginning,  such  a twofold  history. 
The  helpfulness  of  this  Gospel  to  all  Christian 
growth  in  the  soul,  which  has  been  manifest  in  all 
ages  as  derived  from  this  peculiarity  in  its  character, 
is  itself  the  strongest  proof  that  it  came  from  the 
author’s  own  inner  life  as  a gift  to  the  world. 

This  part  of  our  discussion  must  be  arrested  at  this 
point.  But  enough  has  been  said  to  establish  the 
assertion  made  at  the  beginning.  The  Fourth  Gospel 
was  intended  by  its  author  to  be  a record,  not  only 
of  the  life  of  Christ  and  not  only  of  John’s  personal 
observation  of  Christ,  but  also  of  John’s  growth  in 
faith,  of  his  Christian  experience,  which  had  come 
out  of  that  personal  observation.  He  desired  that  his 
readers  should  feel,  as  they  perused  his  book,  that 
this  Apostle  was  giving  them  his  testimony,  not  alone 
by  itself,  but  with  the  emphasis  and  impressiveness 
that  would  be  imparted  to  it  by  the  intimations  of 
what  it  had  accomplished  for  his  own  soul. 

We  have,  thus  far,  made  no  attempt  to  determine 
whether  the  author  was  the  Apostle  himself,  or  some 
other  and  later  person.  Our  sole  object  has  been  to 
set  forth  and  prove  a certain  peculiar  characteristic 
of  the  book,  which  he  wrote.  This  characteristic, 
however,  having  been  made  clear,  the  question  of 
the  authorship  now  demands  our  attention.  But  it 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


177 


presents  itself  only  in  a single  point  of  view,  — ask- 
ing, Who,  and  who  alone,  could  have  been  the  writer 
of  a book  so  peculiarly  characterized  ? At  the  same 
time,  it  naturally  suggests  to  us  the  mode  of  inquiry, 
by  means  of  which  we  may  come  to  a decision,  — 
namely,  by  inquiring  what  are  the  characteristics  of 
the  writer,  as  made  manifest  in  his  writings.  Could 
a man  possessed  of  such  characteristics  have  written 
such  a book,  unless  he  were  himself  the  person  who 
had  passed  through  the  inner  experience  which  the 
book  reminds  us  of,  or  rests  upon  ? 

1.  There  was  in  the  author’s  mental  character  a 
certain  philosophical  element.  He  was  not,  indeed, 
a man  who  patiently  investigated  the  reasons  and 
causes  of  things,  or  who  deduced  from  a large  collec- 
tion of  facts  a rule  or  principle.  The  speculations 
of  philosophers  strictly  so  called,  even  when  they 
were  within  the  sphere  of  religious  inquiry,  he  per- 
haps had  little  sympathy  with,  though  he,  appa- 
rently, entered  into  them  far  enough  to  comprehend 
what  these  men  were  seeking  after,  and  to  know  their 
errors.  But,  in  the  fact  that  his  mind  was  occupied 
with  great  truths,  and  that  he  rose  above  the  lower 
objects  of  thought  to  the  highest  and  noblest,  he  pos- 
sessed this  element  in  no  ordinary  degree.  His  in- 
tellectual powers  were  of  the  intuitive  or  perceptive, 
rather  than  of  the  reasoning  order,  yet  he  was  both  a 
learner  and  a teacher  in  the  school  of  truth.  Now, 
with  such  a character  and  position  as  this,  if  he  had 
lived  in  the  second  century,  he  would  have  been 
either,  as  truly  as  any  of  the  philosophers,  a devotee 


178 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


of  some  particular  system  who  desired  to  bring  others 
to  accept  it,  or,  at  least,  an  ardent  lover  of  the  ideas 
which  filled  his  mind  and  elevated  his  character. 
Had  he  been  the  former,  we  may  hold,  with  greatest 
confidence,  that  he  would  not  have  written  such  a 
book  as  he  has,  in  any  measure.  The  prologue,*  as 
has  been  so  often  said,  would  have  extended  itself 
over  the  whole  Gospel.  Its  ideas  would  have 
appeared  continually  in  the  discourses  of  Jesus, 
expressed  in  the  phraseology  which  so  peculiarly 
belongs  to  it.  The  relation  of  all  the  following  chap- 
ters to  this  introductory  passage,  and  their  develop- 
ment out  of  it,  would  have  been  set  forth  by  the 
author  in  the  most  distinct  language.  All  the  inci- 
dental allusions  to  little  circumstances,  which,  having 
no  possible  connection  with  the  system  taught,  would 
only  draw  away  the  reader’s  attention  from  it,  would 
have  been  omitted.  Jesus  would  have  been  repre- 
sented far  more  in  the  light  of  the  master  of  a school  , 
commending  to  his  disciples  the  study  of  his  system 
for  its  own  sake.  In  his  last  interview  with  them, 
even,  we  should  probably  have  found  him  committing 
to  them  this  system  more  formally  as  a parting  leg- 
acy, and  pointing  them  to  it,  rather  than  so  exclu- 
sively to  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  and  a future 
meeting  in  the  other  world,  for  their  consolation  and 
support.  But  if  he  were  not,  thus,  the  adherent  or 
defender  of  a particular  school,  and,  therefore,  we 
are  unable  to  say,  with  confidence,  all  that  we  could 
say  if  he  had  been,  the  existence  of  this  element  in 
his  mind,  in  whatever  degree  we  are  compelled  to 


* John  1: 1-18. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


179 


admit  it,  is,  iu  just  that  degree,  inconsistent  with  the 
peculiarity  of  the  Gospel  which  has  been  noticed  in 
these  pages.  If  he  only  loved  the  truths  which  had 
revealed  themselves  to  him,  and  wished* above  all 
things  else  to  make  them  known  to  mankind,  this 
element  and  tendency  in  his  character  would  have 
turned  him  in  another  direction.  He  might,  indeed, 
have  undertaken  to  write  the  life  of  Jesus,  with  some 
of  its  incidents  as  well  as  of  its  teachings.  But,  if  he 
had  done  so,  he  would  have  given  even  of  the  inci- 
dents of  Jesus’  outward  history  only  enough  to  bind 
the  teachings  together ; while,  as  he  had  not  himself 
had  any  inner  life  in  connection  with  those  incidents 
and  under  the  immediate  influence  of  Jesus’  presence 
with  him  as  a teacher,  the  undercurrent  flowing  under 
all  his  plan  and  through  all  his  record  would,  surely, 
not  have  been  his  own  experience.  Still  less  would 
he  have  assumed  a personality  other  than  his  own, 
and  then  have  fabricated  a religious  history  for  the 
person  whose  name  he  adopted,  which  was  as  com- 
pletely unknown  to  that  person  as  he  was  himself. 
His  interest  vrould  have  been  centred  upon  the 
truths  and  the  teacher,  and  the  more  thoroughly  he 
had  accustomed  himself  to  dwell  upon  these,  the  less 
would  any  such  course  have  even  occurred  to  his 
mind.  There  would  have  been  a far  easier  as  well 
as  nobler  method  for  him  to  choose  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  his  end,  and  his  every  impulse  would 
have  been  to  adopt  it.  The  Christ  of  John  has  been 
claimed  to  be  the  counterpart  of  the  Socrates  of 
Plato.  Could  Plato  have  traced  through  all  the  dis- 
courses and  history  of  Socrates  such  a line  of  false 


180 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


experience  represented  as  his  own  ? Would  not  the 
tendencies  and  characteristics  of  his  mind  have  pre- 
vented him?  Would  they  not  have  made  anything 
else  mor^  natural  to  him  and  less  repulsive  ? 

2.  The  author  had,  also,  a poetic  element.  But 
the  peculiarity  of  his  presentation  of  this  inner  life 
of  the  Apostle  is  as  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  a 
mere  poetic  fiction,  as  is  the  peculiarity  of  his  record 
of  the  outward  history.  Whatever  the  Gospel  may 
be,  it  is  not  a poem.  There  is  no  such  peculiar 
symmetry  and  completeness  in  its  plot,  or  roundness 
and  fulness  in  its  minor  incidents,  as  would  be  the 
first  necessity  to  the  poet’s  thought.  And  so  it  is 
with  these  indications  of  what  was  personal  and  in- 
ward to  himself.  All  is  too  incidental,  too  irregular, 
too  imperfect  in  the  beauty  of  form,  to  be  the  work 
of  poetic  imagination.  Had  the  author,  years  after 
the  death  of  the  Apostle,  endeavored  to  picture  to 
himself  his  character,  and  how  it  developed  into  what 
it  was  at  the  end  by  the  gradual  progress  of  a life- 
time, and,  then,  had  he  tried  to  write  the  history  of 
Jesus  with  the  picture  of  this  growing  character  con- 
tinually coloring  that  history, — and  this  is  what  he 
must  have  done  if  we  have  a poetic  fiction  of  a later  day, 
— then,  he  must  have  been  more  careful  of  tlieform^ 
and  must  have  made  the  Apostle’s  growing  character, 
not  indeed  more  really  traceable  throughout  the 
story,  but  more  openly  conspicuous.  But  the  poetic 
element  in  the  author’s  mind,  which  we  discover 
through  the  examination  of  his  Gospel,  is  simply 
that  which,  coming  into  the  narrative,  elevates  it 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


181 


above  a mere  dry  record  of  facts,  and  which  imparts 
to  it  something  of  the  richness  of  the  author’s  own 
thought,  and  of  the  fulness  of  his  sense  of  the  truth. 
It  is  that  which  belongs  to  men  of  the  deepest  and 
noblest  order  of  inner  life, — the  poetry  of  such  a life^ 
which,  because  they  possess  it,  they  can  impart,  in 
some  measure,  to  the  record  of  their  own  experi- 
ence, but  never  to  the  experience  of  another,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  it  is  not  their  own.  It  is  not 
developed  largely  enough  in  them  to  make  them 
poets,  or  to  give  them  the  ability  to  produce  a life- 
like fiction.  It  leaves  them  in  an  entirely  difierent 
class  of  men,  destitute  of  the  power  to  assume  the 
personality  of  some  one  of  another  age,  in  a truth- 
ful way,  as  the  poet  or  novelist  may  do.  If  they 
attempt  to  assume  such  a personality  at  all,  it  must 
be  in  a manner  so  imperfect  and  unskilful  as  at 
once  to  betray  its  falseness,  and,  therefore,  at  once 
to  become  abhorrent  to  their  own  deepest  feelings, 
as  well  as  to  be  easily  detected  by  every  one  else.  In 
one  word,  the  book  must  have  been  other  than  it  is, 
and  more  than  it  is  in  this  regard,  — the  author,  also, 
must  have  been  other  than  he  was,  and  more  than 
he  was  on  this  poetic  side  of  his  nature, — if  either 
of  them  belonged  to  a later  age.  The  Apostle,  and 
the  Apostle  alone,  could  have  traced,  in  this  peculiar 
way,  the  story  of  his  own  faith ; for  he  only  could 
have  had  that  richness  of  sentiment  and  emotion 
connected  with  it,  out  of  which  springs  all  the  poetic 
character  that  the  book  possesses. 

3.  The  author,  again,  was  of  the  contemplative 


182 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


and  introvertive  order.  But,  in  this  view  of  his 
character,  also,  we  say  that  the  Gospel,  as  it  has  pre- 
sented itself  to  us,  is  inconsistent  with  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  author  lived  in  the  second  century. 
The  results,  which  would  be  naturally  expected  either 
from  the  contemplation  or  the  introversion  of  such  a 
man,  are  not  sufficiently  manifest.  Having  nothing 
but  the  traditions  and  accounts  within  the  circle  of 
the  Synoptical  Gospels  before  him,  he  would  have 
mused  upon  them  and  received  their  impressions  into 
his  mind.  As  he  thought  more  and  more  deeply,  he 
would  have  felt  himself  impelled  to  draw  out  of  them 
the  truths  which  Jesus  taught,  and  perhaps  to  give 
these  truths,  as  he  understood  them,  to  the  world. 
He  might,  indeed,  have  brought  himself,  by  medita- 
tion, into  some  ideas  of  Jesus  beyond  those  which  he 
found  in  these  early  writings,  believing  that  the  hints 
which  they  contained  were  suggestive  of  more  than 
the  writers  had  supposed.  The  workings  of  these 
ideas  in  his  own  mind,  with  their  effect  upon  his 
character,  might  have  given  him  greater  confidence 
in  them,  as  well  as  a deeper  sense  of  their  import- 
ance to  mankind.  But  had  all  this  been  so,  what 
would  have  been  the  book  which  resulted  from  it  ? 
Would  it  not  have  contained,  not  only  the  formal 
statements  of  these  ideas,  but  something  of  the 
method  by  which  they  had  grown  out  of  the  Apos- 
tolic writings  ? Would  it  not,  also,  have  attempted 
to  show,  in  a formal  way,  the  legitimate  and  natural 
influence  of  these  ideas  upon  the  soul  of  man  ? Or, 
if  this  author’s  desire  had  been  to  set  forth  this 
latter  point  by  the  presentation  of  an  example  in 


THE  FOURTH' GOSPEL. 


183 


human  life,  would  not  the  presentation  have  been  a 
less  ineidental  one?  But  the  apostle,  if  he  were  of 
this  eharacter,  might  most  naturally  bring  out  this 
other  side  of  Jesus’  teachings,  which  the  Synoptical 
writers  had  left  in  the  main  unnoticed,  but  which  he 
had  meditated  upon  for  so  many  years.  And,  while 
his  main  design  was  to  give  this  picture  of  Jesus  as 
proving  him  to  be  the  Logos,  the  very  introvertive 
tendencies  of  his  nature  would  not  only  have  made 
it  natural  for  him  to  do  so,  but  would  have  almost 
compelled  him  to  carry  through  the  history  the  thread 
of  his  own  Christian  experience,  precisely  as  we 
discover  it  in  this  Gospel.  He  is  the  person  whom 
all  the  antecedent  probabilities  of  the  case  point  to 
as  the  writer ; for  the  fadts  which  we  observe  pre- 
cisely correspond  with  these  elements  in  his  character, 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  if  we  suppose  a later  writer, 
there  is  no  such  correspondence. 

4.  If  we  turn,  now,  to  the  moral  elements  in  the 
author’s  nature,  the  love  of  truth  is  one  of  the  most 
conspicuous.  Everywhere  in  the  Gospel  and  in  his 
other  writings  we  find  the  evidences  of  this  character- 
istic. The  essential  and  fundamental  thing  in  the 
right  worship  and  service  of  God  is  made  by  him  to 
be  truths  and  the  sphere  in  which  the  great  enemy 
of  God’s  kingdom  and  all  his  followers  live  is  the 
opposite  of  truth.  The  sense  of  its  beauty  is  so 
deeply  implanted  in  his  nature,  that  religion  becomes 
to  his  thought  the  truths — the  word  entering  into 
his  phraseology  so  thoroughly  as  even  to  mark  his 
style  in  distinction  from  that  of  the  other  New  Testa- 


184 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


ment  writers.  It  is  needless  to  dwell  upon  this  point, 
for  it  is  manifest  to  every  reader  who  gives  even  a 
single  thought  to  what  he  reads.  He  who  says,  Let 
ns  not  love  in  word  or  in  tongue,  but  in  deed  and  in 
truth ; They  that  worship  him  must  worship  him  in 
truth,  for  the  Father  seeketh  such  to  worship  him  ; 
Thy  word  is  truth ; The  only-begotten  of  the  Father, 
w^ho  came  into  the  world,  was  full  of  truth  ; He  came 
to  bear  witness  of  the  truth ; If  we  say  we  have  fel- 
lowship with  Him,  and  walk  in  darkness,  we  lie  and 
do  not  the  truth  ; No  lie  is  of  the  truth ; The  devil  is 
a liar  and  the  father  of  falsehood  ; Whosoever  loveth 
and  maketh  a lie  is  excluded  from  the  heavenly  king- 
dom,— must  have  regarded  truth  as  the  basis  of  all 
right  character,  and  must  have  valued  it  as  his  chief 
treasure.*  How  could  such  a man  have  placed  a 
falsehood  at  the  very  beginning  of  his  work  as  an 
author,  giving  to  his  readers  the  impression  that  he 
was  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved,  when  in  reality 
he  had  never  seen  Jesus  at  all?  But,  if  he  was  of  a 
later  age,  this  is  not  all  that  we  are  compelled  to 
suppose.  Not  only  must  he  have  assumed  the  per- 
sonality of  the  apostle,  but  he  must  have  assumed  it 
in  such  a way  as  would  involve  the  most  deliberate 


* The  last  of  the  passages  here  cited  is  from  the  Book  of  Bevela- 
tion.  If  the  authorship  of  that  hook  by  the  apostle  John  be  not 
admitted,  this  passage  is,  of  course,  out  of  place ; but  its  insertion 
or  omission  is  a matter  of  little  consequence,  when  the  others  are  so 
numerous  and  clear.  The  other  passages  are  taken  from  the  first 
Epistle  of  John  as  well  as  the  Gospel,  — it  being  generally  admitted 
that  these  two  books  were  by  the  same  author,  whether  he  was  the 
Apostle  John  or  not.  The  point  which  is  urged  here,  however,  is  suf- 
ficiently plain,  if  we  confine  ourselves  to  citations  from  the  Gospel 
alone. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


185 


and  painstaking  falsification,  for  his  representation 
of  the  apostle’s  inner  life  and  growing  faith  is  pre- 
cisely that  which  must  have  been  either  the  truth  or 
a labored  imitation  of  it.  It  underlies  and  pervades 
the  whole  history,  as  we  have  seen,  but  does  not 
appear  as  the  main  end  of  the  writer’s  effort,  or  pre- 
sent itself  as  a well-rounded  and  complete  portrayal 
of  character.  The  more  incidentally,  however,  it 
manifests  itself,  the  more  difficult  must  it  have  been 
for  the  author  to  trace  out  its  course,  and  the  more 
carefully  designed  must  have  been  the  attempt  to 
deceive  his  readers.  We  pass  by  all  the  other  falsi- 
fications which  the  book,  under  the  supposition  of  a 
later  date,  would  contain,  — though  they  cover  a large 
portion  of  the  history  of  Jesus,  as  well  as  that  of  this 
disciple,  — and  limit  ourselves  to  the  one  only  which 
our  line  of  thought  brings  to  our  notice.  How  could 
such  a man,  more  full  of  truth  than  almost  any  other, 
have  purposely  made  such  a falsehood  the  very  frame^ 
worh  of  all  that  he  was  writing  ? It  has  been  well 
said  by  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  the  recent  adver- 
saries of  this  Gospel,  in  view  of  other  difficulties 
which  meet  us  on  the  theory  that  the  author  was  not 
the  one  he  professes  to  be,  that  we  have  no  example 
of  a forgery  of  this  kind  in  the  apostolic  age.  We 
may  well  add,  after  observing  this  peculiar  element 
of  inner  experience,  that  we  have  no  example,  in  any 
age,  of  such  a forgery  from  such  a man.  The  truth- 
fulness of  his  character  and  the  falsehood  of  his 
Gospel  in  this  regard  are  utterly  irreconcilable.  But 
the  truthfulness  of  his  character  shines  forth  clearly 
on  every  page.  He  must,  therefore,  have  been  the 
apostle  himself. 


'186 


TUB  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


5.  The  author  of  this  Gospel  was  characterized 
by  the  strongest  love  to  Jesus.  This  is  so  evident 
as  to  be  admitted  by  all  the  leading  opponents  of  the 
Johannean  authorship,  and  cannot  be  doubted  if  we 
are  to  believe  anything  of  any  author  because  of  his 
writings.  But  his  affection  was  not  only  strong. 
Its  chief  peculiarity  consisted  in  the  fact  that  it  was 
a deep  and  absorbing  persona?  attachment.  He  loved, 
according  to  the  often-quoted  remark  of  Grotius,  not 
so  much  the  Christ,  in  his  official  and  saving  rela- 
tions to  the  world,  — as  Peter  loved  him,  — but 
Jesus,  as  an  intimate  friend  of  his  own.  The  Gospel 
professes  that  this  love  was  developed  in  the  author’s 
soul  through  his  association  with  Jesus  as  the  most 
intimate  and  confidential  one  among  the  company  of 
the  apostles.  The  fact  of  its  development  in  this  way 
is  made  to  appear  throughout  the  narrative,  and  the 
process  of  its  development  seems  to  be  the  underly- 
ing personal  experience,  out  of  which,  at  least  in  one 
view  of  it,  the  whole  history  springs.  Now,  that  all 
this  is  in  perfect  consistency  with  the  supposition  that 
the  apostle  J ohn  was  himself  the  author,  is  too  plain 
to  be  questioned.  There  is  not  a difficulty  in  this 
regard,  which  the  Gospel  presents,  if  we  once  accept 
this  view.  On  the^  other  hand,  not  only  does  the 
representation  of  the  matter,  as  a whole,  appear  alto- 
gether natural,  but  the  many  little  and  apparently 
unpremeditated  allusions  or  suggestions,  which  seem 
to  mark  this  affection  of  the  author  for  J esus  as  that 
of  a man  who  had  seen  him,  had  talked  with  him  and 
lived  with  him,  had  listened  to  his  teachings  and 
been  present  at  his  death,  and  which  distinguish  it. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


187 


thus,  from  the  love  of  any  one  who,  living  after- 
wards, could  only  have  been  able  to  commune  with 
him  in  thought,  fall  into  their  places  just  where  we 
should  expect  them,  and  add  to  the  charm  and  beauty 
of  the  book. 

But  if  the  author  was  not  the  apostle,  but  a man 
of  a later  generation,  the  difficulties  that  we  meet 
are  insuperable.  Such  an  absorbing  personal  affec- 
tion for  Jesus  would  either  have  made  him  a mystic 
and  filled  his  Gospel  with  the  outbreakings  of  rapt 
emotion,  or  it  would  have  so  deeply  felt  the  want  of 
some  more  immediate  sight  of  Jesus  than  had  ever 
been  granted  to  it  as  to  have  betrayed  this  feeling 
somewhere,  in  spite  of  its  utmost  efforts  at  conceal- 
ment. A writer  of  a depth  of  love  like  this,  which 
pervaded  his  whole  being,  could  scarcely  have  trans- 
ferred himself  beyond  the  boundaries  and  peculiari- 
ties of  his  own  experience,  and  represented  his  love 
as  having  grown  under  entirely  different  circum- 
stances, and  into  a form  which,  in  this  respect,  was 
completely  other  than  his  own.  The  more  his  pecu- 
liar emotion  — that  of  love  for  a person  whom  he  had 
never  seen,  but  the  conception  of  whose  character  he 
had  gained  from  reading  and  from  meditation  only  — 
became  the  element  of  his  life,  the  more,  even,  would 
he  have  found  himself  fettered  and  hindered  in  any 
attempt  of  this  kind.  Paul  himself,  near  as  he  was 
to  the  time  of  Christ’s  life  on  earth,  acquainted  as  he 
was  with  those  who  had  been  in  his  society,  blessed 
as  he  was  with  a special  manifestation  of  him  on  the 
way  to  Damascus,  attended  as  he  was,  again  and 
again,  by  visions  and  revelations,  — Paul  himself, 


188 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


we  all  feel,  could  not  have  wiitten  a story  of  such  a 
development  of  love  as  we  find  in  this  Gospel,  as  if 
it  were  his  own.  His  conceptions  could  not  have 
overleaped  his  history  so  far  and  so  fully,  as  to  have 
given  him  power  to  picture  his  affection  for  Jesus 
with  the  distinctive  character  which  belongs  only  to 
those  who  live  in  the  bodily  presence  of  a friend. 
He  did  not  have  this  feeling  towards  Jesus ; and  he 
could  not,  had  he  tried  to  do  so,  have  deceived  the 
world  into  the  belief  that  he  had.  At  some  unguarded 
point  in  the  narrative  the  mask  would  have  been 
dropped,  if  only  for  a moment,  and,  in  the  single 
sentence  or  paragraph  written  before  it  could  be 
assumed  again,  a thousand  eyes  would  have  discov- 
ered the  falsehood.  How  much  less  even  than  Paul 
could  a writer  of  another  century  have  done  the  same 
thing ! The  deeper  his  love  for  the  unseen  Christ, 
the  more  impossible  would  have  been  the  portrayal 
of  it  as  a love  for  the  seen  Christ.  The  persons  on 
whom  a peculiar  blessing  was  pronounced  by  Jesus, 
after  Thomas  had  acknowledged  him  as  his  Lord  and 
God,  because  they  believe  without  the  evidence  which 
he  demanded,  know  nothing  of  the  peculiar  experi- 
ence that  Thomas  had.  A fundamental  element  in 
their  believing  is  the  absence  of  sight,  while  to  his 
faith  sight  was  essential.  What  more  difficult  task, 
and  what  one  less  likely  to  be  undertaken  by  a Chris- 
tian of  very  deep  and  pervading  faith,  who  lived  in 
Ephesus  after  the  death  of  John,  than  that  of  repre- 
senting the  growth  of  his  own  belief  as  having  been 
due  to  his  sight  of  Jesus  during  his  earthly  life,  and  to 
his  daily  intercourse  with  him.  He  would  have  been 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


189 


trying  to  describe  the  inmost  springs  and  secrets  of  his 
interior  life  as  the  very  opposite  of  what  they  were. 

But  not  only  may  we  say,  that  an  author  possessed 
of  this  peculiar  and  strong  affection  for  Jesus  could 
not  have  written  this  Gospel,  if  he  had  never  seen 
him  as  John  had  seen  him,  — much  more  may  we  say 
that  he  would  not.  He  must  have  known  that  his  life 
of  Jesus  would  produce  upon  his  readers  the  peculiar 
impression  which  it  was  naturally  calculated  to  pro- 
duce. They  would  be  led  to  believe  that  Jesus  said 
many  things  — many,  even,  which  had  a most  im- 
portant bearing  upon  the  character  a^nd  the  soul  — 
which  he  did  not  say.  The  friend  whom  he  most 
deeply  loved  would,  thus,  be  presented  in  a false 
light.  Not  only  so,  but  all  his  own  relations  to  this 
friend,  and  the  influences  of  this  friend  upon  his  own 
mind  and  heart,  would  be  described  in  a manner 
utterly  at  variance  with  the  facts.  If,  with  this 
knowledge,  he  wrote  as  he  did,  purposely  deceived. 
He  deliberately  falsified  the  words  of  Jesus  and  his 
own  interior  history  in  connection  with  him.  Such 
deception  and  falsification,  however,  are  as  contrary 
to  noble  friendship  as  they  are  to  truth.  Love  to 
Jesus,  like  that  which  he  evidently  had,  would  have 
made  him  shrink  at  the  very  thought  of  writing  such 
a baseless  story  of  his  life.  The  existence  of  such 
love,  pervading  and  controlling  his  own  soul,  would 
have  made  it,  to  his  feeling,  impossible  for  him  to  give 
a false  picture  of  its  own  peculiar  quality  and  growth. 

View  the  characteristics  of  this  author,  then,  as  we 
may,  they  seem  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  his 


190 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


writing  the  life  of  Jesus,  with  the  peculiar  element  of 
personal  inward  growth  which  we  find  in  this  Gospel, 
unless  he  was  the  Apostle  whom  he  professes  to  be. 
No  conception  of  such  a book  would  have  entered  his 
mind  had  he  lived  in  the  second  century.  Much  less 
would  the  preparation  of  it  have  been  tolerable  to  his 
thought. 

The  same  things,  we  add  in  a single  word,  may  be 
urged,  and  in  some  respects  with  even  greater  force, 
against  the  supposition  that  the  Gospel  was  written 
at  the  end  of  the  first  century,  and  was  ascribed  to 
the  Apostle  although  he  was  not  the  author,  or  that 
it  was  partly  his  work  but  was  added  to  and  shaped 
into  a harmonious  whole  by  some  of  his  friends  or 
followers.  This  underlying  personal  experience  is 
so  intimately  connected  with  every  portion  of  the 
entire  history,  that  it  disproves  any  joint  author- 
ship or  any  working  over  of  a partial  or  fragmen- 
tary narrative  into  completeness ; while,  as  for  the 
other  supposition,  in  the  year  one  hundred  the 
character  and  history  of  the  Apostle  were  too  well 
known  in  the  re2;ion  of  his  residence  to  have  allowed 
the  possibility  of  ascribing  to  him,  with  success, 
not  only  a life  of  Jesus  which  was  so  largely  unre- 
liable in  its  statements,  but  also  a portrayal  of 
his  own  inner  life  which  was  not  founded  upon  the 
truth. 

But  if  the  Gospel  was,  indeed,  the  work  of  the 
Apostle  John,  we  have  in  it  an  exhibition  of  the 
power  of  Christianity  as  it  presents  itself  to  men  of 
the  most  thoughtful  and  the  purest  minds.  The  author 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


191 


of  this  Gospel,  as  the  world  is  coming  to  acknowledge 
more  and  more,  belonged  to  this  class  of  men,  and 
was  even  an  exalted  one  among  them.  He  was  not 
a man  of  weak  and  effeminate  nature.  He  had, 
indeed,  the  devotion  of  love  that  belongs  to  a woman, 
but  the  strength  of  intellect  and  the  profound  thought 
which  characterize  the  higher  order  of  men. 

How  did  the  Christian  truth  commend  itself  to  his 
acceptance?  It  did  so,  because  it  appealed  to  his 
consciousness  of  the  great  fact  of  sin,  and  offered  him 
help  in  escaping  from  its  power.  It  did  so,  thus,  on 
the  ground,  and  the  only  ground,  on  which  any 
religious  system  can  fitly  commend  itself.  No  one 
among  the  New  Testament  authors  had  a more 
thorough  realization  of  sin  as  the  sphere  in  which  the 
world  was  living.  It  was  the  darkness  which  shut 
out  the  light.  It  was  the  bondage  in  which  all  were 
hopelessly  involved.  It  was  the  evil  principle  which 
wrought  out  the  death  of  the  soul.  Until  this  con- 
sciousness of  the  great  fact  of  sin  is  awakened, 
there  can  be  little  power  in  Christianity  to  bring 
a man  to  itself.  He  has  the  blindness  which  de- 
clares that  it  sees,  and,  therefore,  his  sin  remains 
immovable,  because  he  will  not  recognize  its  exist- 
ence. But  the  moment  the  awakening  takes  place, 
the  power  become  a mighty  one,  and  the  more 
honest  and  thoughtful  the  soul  is,  the  more  firmly 
does  that  power  lay  hold  upon  it.  To  a man  like 
this  Apostle^  who  comes  to  the  realization  of  sin, 
it  is  the  main  reality  of  his  life.  The  need  of  escape 
from  its  defiling  influence  is  the  greatest  of  all  needs. 
The  way  by  which  escape  can  be  secured  is  the  one 


192 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


thing  to  be  searched  after,  and,  if  possible,  to  be 
found. 

Christianity  commended  itself  to  his  acceptance, 
because  of  the  way  which  it  opened.  It  was  a way 
in  which  the  Divine  Being  Himself  drew  near  to  his 
soul,  with  all  the  tender  sympathies  and  deep 
thoughts  and  elevating  affections  of  a personal  friend, 
and  offered  him  His  own  guidance  and  help  and 
teaching.  The  personal  power  of  soul  upon  soul, 
this  Apostle  knew,  as  every  man  of  deep  and  noble 
nature  like  him  knows, — if,  by  any  means,  it  can 
pass  from  God  to  man, — is  the  highest  conceivable 
force  to  transform  and  elevate  the  character ; to 
deliver  it  from  all  evil,  and  fill  it  with  purity  and 
beauty.  Having  been  invited  into  the  society  of  the 
man  to  whom  John  the  Baptist  had  pointed  him,  he 
communed  with  Him  and  learned  from  Him  during 
the  whole  period  of  His  public  ministry ; and,  at  every 
successive  step  of  his  course,  he  found  himself  be- 
lieving in  Him  more  thoroughly,  until  at  last  he  felt 
that  he  knew,  as  with  the  most  perfect  knowledge, 
that  in  Him  this  personal  power  was  made  a reality. 
The  Divine  Logos  had  entered  into  humanity.  God 
was  with  his  soul.  The  reason  of  his  confidence  was 
the  truths  which  he  had  heard,  the  character  which 
he  had  seen,  the  love  which  had  displayed  itself,  the 
experience  in  his  own  life  of  the  power  of  this  char- 
acter, and  of  this  love,  and  of  these  truths.  He 
placed  himself  in  the  light  and  under  the  influence 
of  Jesus’  life  and  words ; and,  opening  his  soul  to 
receive  what  they  might  give  him,  he  waited  through 
the  years  before  the  crucifixion ; and  his  opened  soul. 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


193 


he  says  at  the  end,  had  received  all  that  it  wanted. 
The  deliverance  from  sin  had  come,  and  the  begin- 
ning of  a growth  in  holiness  and  love  which  promised 
to  be  endless.  He  waited  on  through  the  years  after 
the  crucifixion,  also, — his  every  thought  upon  the 
same  life  and  words  of  his  Master, — and  the  highest 
hope  of  his  soul  for  the  immortal  future  was,  that  he 
might  become  more  perfectly  like  the  Master  because 
he  should  see  him  as  he  is. 

Now,  if  the  Apostle  gives  this  record,  we  learn 
from  it  that  the  richest  life  of  the  richest  soul,  per- 
chance, that  the  world  has  ever  known,  came  to  its 
earthly  perfection  through  its  following  of  Jesus  as 
the  incarnate  Son  of  God,  who  led  it  out  of  the 
dominion  of  sin  by  the  power  of  his  own  friendly 
aid.  If  he  was  mistaken  in  his  view  of  Jesus,  he, 
at  least,  gained  a great  result  from  his  life  with  him ; 
and  a similar  union  with  Jesus,  so  far  as  it  is  still  pos- 
sible, must,  as  it  would  seem,  be  away  of  reaching 
the  same  end.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  he  was  not 
mistaken,  it  is  the  way,,  and  the  only  way ; and  the 
Christian  system  will  manifest  itself  to  every  soul, 
deep  and  genuine  and  true  as  his  was,  to  be  the 
truth, — resting  upon  the  consciousness,  in  the  soul, 
of  sin  as  a reality,  and  pointing  to  the  incarnation  as 
the  personal  power  of  God  working  upon  the  soul 
for  its  deliverance.  But  was  he  mistaken? 

This  Gospel,  in  the  view  of  it  which  we  have 
taken,  suggests  to  us,  at  this  point,  another  thought. 
Here  is  the  record  of  the  impressions  which  the 
Apostle  declares  to  have  been  produced  upon  his 
mind  by  what  he  had  heard  and  seen  of  Jesus  during 


194 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


his  life  with  him.  If  they  were  false  or  iinfounclecl, 
Jesus  himself  must  have  known  them  to  be  so.  If, 
then,  they  were  suffered  to  remain  uncontradicted, 
the  responsibility  rests  upon  Jesus  himself.  But 
would  Jesus,  who  was  so  truthful  in  his  character, 
and  so  warm  in  his  friendship  for  all  his  disciples, 
and  preeminently  for  this  one  of  them,  have  allowed 
them  to  continue  deceived  in  regard  to  himself  and 
his  mission?  Would  he  have  left  this  most  intimate 
friend  exposed,  for  his  whole  lifetime,  to  such  error, 
when  a word  from  himself  would  have  corrected  it  ? 
Think  of  the  interview  which  Jesus  had  with  the 
disciples  on  the  evening  before  his  death,  when  all 
the  tenderest  emotions  of  the  soul  were  called  forth, 
— a scene  without  a counterpart  in  history,  — and 
if  this  inner  life  of  the  Apostle  had  not  been  growing 
up  under  the  influence  of  true  ideas,  if  his  belief 
and  that  of  his  companions  was  not  the  truth,  we 
are  forced  to  hold  that  the  friend  who  was  speaking 
to  them  so  tenderly  was,  at  the  very  moment  of  his 
apparent  friendship,  leaving  them  to  a delusion, 
which  they  were  to  extend  as  widely  over  the  world 
as  they  could.  Even  more  than  this,  he  was,  at  that 
final  hour,  intentionally  deceiving  them  in  the  posi- 
tive declaration  of  untruths.  Let  the  man  who  can 
persuade  himself  of  such  an  impossibility,  believe  it. 
The  world  has  no  virtue  in  it,  and  has  never  seen 
truth  in  any  soul,  if  Jesus  was  untruthful. 

We  are  compelled,  I say,  to  hold  that  Jesus  was  a 
deceiver  of  his  nearest  friends,  if  the  impressions  of 
this  author,  as  he  gives  them,  are  unfounded;  for 
the  only  other  suppositions  possible  in  the  case  are 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


195 


com]3letely  untenable.  The  one  is,  that  Jesus  was 
himself  deceived.  But  the  comprehension  of  the 
truth  and  of  the  human  soul  which  Jesus  had,  as  well 
as  his  calm  possession  of  himself,  were  such  that  he 
could  not  have  been  carried  away  by  the  dreamy 
vision  of  a greatness  which  was  far  above  him.  If 
even  in  one  unguarded  moment  he  indulged  such  a 
fancy,  he  must,  as  his  clearer  insight  returned  to 
him,  have  penetrated  the  self-deception,  and  seen 
himself  again  precisely  as  he  was.  If  he  allowed  it 
to  come  upon  him  again  and  again,  or  yielded  him- 
self up  to  its  power  as  it  came,  he  must  have  done  so 
willingly,  and,  therefore,  must  have  been  one  who 
was  not  deluded  only,  but  who  was  something  more 
and  worse  than  this.  The  most  recent  and  most 
learned  of  the  adversaries  of  this  Gospel  who  enter- 
tain this  view  respecting  Jesus,  even  in  a limited 
degree,  is  obliged  to  admit  this,  and  to  confess  that 
he  must  have,  also,  consciously  assumed  what  he 
knew  did  not  belong  to  him,  and  thus  must  have  been 
partially  a deceiver.  The  theory  of  his  being  de- 
ceived is,  thus,  inseparable  from  that  of  his  being 
also  untruthful.  The  former  involves,  of  necessity, 
in  his  case  some  admixture  of  the  latter,  and  it  falls 
if  the  latter  falls. 

The  other  supposition  is,  that,  though  the  apostle 
records  these  impressions  as  those  which  were  made 
upon  him  while  he  was  in  the  society  of  his  Master, 
they  were  in  fact  — so  far  as  they  had  reference  to 
Jesus’  higher  work  and  divine  nature — only  the 
fruit  of  his  subsequent  musings  after  Jesus’  death. 
He  attributed  to  his  Master,  thus,  what  he  came  him- 


196 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL, 


self  to  believe  in  only  in  his  own  later  years.  The 
impossibility  of  this,  we  believe,  has  been  already 
made  sufficiently  clear  by  the  line  of  thought  which 
we  have  followed  throughout  this  discussion.  But 
there  is  a particular  point  which  we  may  notice  for  a 
moment,  and  in  connection  with  which  we  may  con- 
fidently reject  this  supposition.  In  three  or  four 
instances  in  this  Gospel,  we  find  the  statement,  which 
has  already  been  referred  to  in  another  connection, 
that  the  author,  or  the  disciples,  did  not  come  to  the 
right  understanding  of  certain  things  until  after  Jesus 
rose  from  the  dead.  These  statements  are  introduced 
in  the  most  incidental  way,  and  are  among  the  many 
indications  that  the  book  is  not  a fraudulent  one. 
But,  if  the  apostle  is  careful  in  these  cases  to  declare 
the  fact  that,  with  reference  to  this  or  that  point,  he 
did  not  comprehend  the  truth  during  Jesus’  lifetime, 
does  not  this  very  painstaking  in  these  cases  show 
that,  in  all  other  cases,  he  did  gain  his  knowledge  or 
belief  loithin  that  period?  In  no  more  emphatic 
way,  as  it  would  seem,  could  he  have  proved  that  he 
did  not  ” muse  himself  into  the  ideas  which  fill  his 
Gospel,  or  change  his  conception  of  his  Master  with 
some  subsequent  change  in  his  own  thoughts  or  sen- 
timents. It  is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  these  little 
sentences,  so  singular  as  they  are,  and  occurring  in 
the  narrative,  as  they  do,  with  so  much  simplicity 
and  naturalness,  prove  beyond  any  reasonable  doubt 
that  John  did  not  attribute  to  Jesus  any  ideas  or 
words,  except  those  which  were  actually  found  in  the 
discourses  that  Jesus  had  himself  uttered  and  John 
had  himself  heard.  We  are  reduced,  then,  to  the 


THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL. 


197 


alternative  that  Jesus  was  a deceiver,  which  contra- 
dicts every  characteristic  of  his  nature  exhibited  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  cannot  be  true,  or  that  the 
views  which  this  apostle  had  of  him  and  of  the  truth 
which  he  taught  were  the  right  views,  — and,  there- 
fore, as  we  have  already  seen,  that  the  way  in  which 
the  apostle’s  life  grew  toward  perfection  must  be 
the  only  way  in  which  any  man  can  obtain  the  same. 
The  argument  which  is,  thus,  derived  from  the  record 
of  this  author’s  inner  life  for  the  truth  of  Christianity 
is  a powerful  one.  It  is  one  which  rises,  as  it  were, 
from  the  deeper  recesses  of  the  gospel'  history^  and  is, 
for  this  very  reason,  of  the  greater  force. 

The  Gospel  which  this  apostle  has  given  us,  then, 
is  not  only  his  biography  of  his  Master ; in  the  light 
in  which  we  have  viewed  it  at  this  time,  it  is,  also, 
his  defence  of  the  truth.  As  men,  in  the  region 
where  he  lived,  had  already  begun  to  be  involved  in 
the  long  discussion  of  the  ages  respecting  God  and 
the  way  in  which  he  reveals  himself  to  the  world, 
their  reasonings  had,  doubtless,  placed  many  of  them 
in  sharp  antagonism  to  the  Christian  ideas.  Some 
of  them,  we  may  believe,  had  become  cavilers  and 
sceptics  who  rested  in  their  philosophy,  and  con- 
ceived of  nothing  higher  or  better  than  their  own 
thoughts.  As  he  looked  out  from  the  quiet  sphere 
of  his  labors,  and  saw  the  dangers  which  were  thus 
threatening  the  faith  which  he  preached;  as  he 
thought  how  rapidly  these  dangers  might  vincrease, 
and  realized  how,  through  the  charm  of  philosophical 
investigation  and  disputation,  they  might  in  a pecu- 


198 


THE  FOUBTH  GOSPEL. 


liar  degree  affect  men  of  cultivated  minds ; and, 
especially,  as  he  felt  that,  with  the  near  ending  of 
his  own  life,  the  last  of  the  original  witnesses  would 
have  passed  away  from  earth,  and  the  church  would 
be  left  without  the  power  of  appealing  to  apostolic 
authority  still  present  with  it, — we  may  suppose  that 
he  felt  impelled  to  leave  behind  him  some  presenta- 
tion of  the  Christian  truth,  which  should,  if  possible, 
avert  these,  dangers.  The  most  powerful  presenta- 
tion, however,  for  this  end  as  well  as  every  other,  he 
felt,  would  be  the  story  of  Jesus^  life.  With  the 
delightful  recollections  of  his  early  experience,  there- 
fore, he  wrote  the  wonderful  book  which  has  been 
the  subject  of  our  thought  at  this  time.  How  strange 
a thing,  those  doubters  and  disbelievers  of  his  own 
era  may  have  said  to  one  another,  as  they  first 
chanced  to  read  its  pages,  — how  strange  a thing  to 
be  thrown  into  the  midst  of  our  learned  controver- 
sies, and  to  defend  the  Christian  doctrine  against  our 
weighty  objections  ! It  may  easily  have  seemed  to 
them  like  the  fond  and  foolish  meditations  of  an  old 
man  who  sees  an  unreal  beauty  in  his  childhood,  or 
remembers  some  teacher  of  his  youthful  days  as  the 
fountain  of  truth.  What  was  this  against  philosophy? 
But  the  simple  story,  which  he  told,  outlived  their 
speculations  and  their  reasonings,  and,  when  they 
had  long  been  forgotten,  it  still  retained  the  freshness 
and  fulness  of  its  power.  It  did  so,  because  it  found 
its  way  behind  and  beneath  all  controversy, — not 
arguing  with  the  doubter,  but  drawing  his  thoughts 
to  the  life  which  had  revealed  the  truths,  and  leaving 
him  in  the  contemplation  of  the  effect  of  those  truths 
as  they  accomplished  their  Work  in  a human  soul. 


THE  FOUItTU  GOSPEL, 


199 


The  story  stands,  to-day,  as  it  has  always  stood  — 
only  that  the  doubters  and  sceptics  now  so  realize  its 
divine  power,  if  it  is  once  accepted  as  coming  from 
an  immediate  disciple  of  Jesus,  that  they  try  to  throw 
doubt  upon  its  truthfulness,  and  to  postpone  its 
authorship  to  a later  generation.  By  the  artlessness 
of  its  record,  which  is  beyond  the  skill  of  any  forger’s 
art,  and  by  the  half-concealed,  yet  ever-revealed, 
tracing  of  its  authors  Christian  faith  and  feeling, 
which  could  only  be  the  work  of  that  one  within 
whose  heart  these  had  found  their  abiding  place,  it 
answers  their  questionings.  And  when  the  sceptics 
of  to-day,  with  all  their  objections  and  their  philoso- 
phy, shall  have  passed  out  of  the  world’s  reverence 
as  completely  as  those  of  the  early  ages  have  already 
passed,  it  will  still  give  to  the  thoughtful  believer  his 
surest  confidence  for  himself,  and  his  strongest  de- 
fense against  his  adversaries,  in  the  inner  life  of 
John  springing  out  of  his  communion  with  the  life 
of  his  Master. 


VII 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 

BY  ANDREW  P.  PEABODY. 

RENAN’S  Life  of  Jesus,  which  before  the  Franco- 
Prussian  war  had  reached  in  the  original  its 
thirteenth  edition,  besides  not  a few  in  its  English 
dress,  is  now  the  gospel  of  the  doubting  and  unbe- 
lieving on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  and  will  remain 
so  till  some  one  bolder  or  more  subtle  than  he  shall 
displace  him,  as  he  displaced  Strauss.  His  book  is 
a charming  one  in  its  delineations  of  everybody  and 
everything  but  Christ.  In  his  chapter  on  the  origi- 
nal disciples,  he  gives  a very  vivid  sketch  of  their 
respective  individualities  ; and  both  in  his  Life  of  Jesus 
and  in  his  work  on  the  Apostles,  he  acknowledges 
the  authenticity  of  the  accounts  we  have  of  them,  the 
miraculous  narratives  alone  excepted.  There  is  in 
the  Introduction  to  his  Life  of  Jesus,  one  very  ex- 
traordinary testimony  to  the  truth  of  the  evangelic 
history,  which  I cannot  forbear  quoting. 

" I have  traversed  in  every  direction  the  district 
where  the  scenes  of  the  Gospel  are  laid.  I have  vis- 
ited Jerusalem,  Hebron,  and  Samaria.  Almost  no 
site  named  in  the  story  of  Jesus  has  escaped  me. 
All  this  narrative,  which  at  a distance  seems  to  float 

200 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


201 


in  the  clouds  of  an  unreal  world,  thus  assumed  a 
body,  a substantial  existence,  which  astonished  me. 
The  striking  coincidence  .of  texts  and  places,  the 
wonderful  harmony  of  the  ideal  of  the  Gospels  with 
the  country  which  served  as  its  frame,  was  for  me  a 
revelation.  I had  before  my  eyes  a fifth  Gospel,  and 
thenceforth,  through  the  stories  of  Matthew  and 
Mark,  instead  of  an  abstract  being  who  one  might 
say  had  never  existed,  I saw  in  life  and  movement  a 
human  form  that  challenged  admiration.” 

In  fine,  Renan  treats  the  entire  New-Testament 
history  as  an  unquestionable  record  of  actual  histori- 
cal personages  and  events,  except  where  the  super- 
natural element  crops  out  in  the  narrative  ; thus  far, 
at  least,  showing  himself  both  a clear-sighted  and  an 
honest  critic.  In  point  of  fact,  the  historical  books 
of  the  New  Testament  have  at  once  so  many  external 
proofs  and  internal  tokens  of  their  authenticity,  as  to 
leave  no  question  concerning  the  substantial  truth  of 
their  narrative  of  ordinary  events,  however  we  may 
dispose  of  the  abnormal  incidents  they  record. 

Resting,  then,  on  the  admitted  authenticity  of  this 
narrative,  I propose  to  draw  from  the  apostles  who 
bear  in  it  so  prominent  a part,  such  testimony  as  they 
oflfer  in  behalf  of  their  Lord  and  Master. 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  not  the  slightest  doubt 
that  of  eleven  of  these  apostles,  most  or  all  incurred 
hardships,  losses,  perils,  persecutions,  and  sufferings 
of  the  severest  character,  in  attestation  of  their  belief 
in  the  Divine  mission  and  authority  of  Jesus;  that 
several  of  them,  as  itinerant  preachers,  devoted  them- 
selves for  the  residue  of  their  lives  to  the  promulga- 


202 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


tion  of  this  belief,  their  zeal  carrying  them  into 
distant  lands,  and  enabling  them  to  overcome  natural, 
social,  and  national  barriers,  insurmountable  except 
to  the  most  ardent  and  self-forgetting  enthusiasm; 
and  that  several  of  them,  in  the  same  cause,  encoun- 
tered and  bravely  endured  beheading,  crucifixion, 
and  other  agonizing  and  ignominious  forms  of  death. 
These  things  attest,  at  least,  the  sincerity  and  the 
intensity  of  their  belief.  Sacrifice  and  martyrdom 
always  prove  as  much  as  this.  But  they  do  not  prove 
the  truth  of  a belief,  — if  they  did,  there  would  be 
no  end  to  the  shams,  contradictions,  and  absurdities, 
which,  as  sealed  by  the  blood  of  their  believers,  we 
should  be  compelled  to  recognize  as  true. 

There  is,  however,  this  peculiarity  which  distin- 
guishes the  apostles  from  all  other  martyrs,  even 
from  other  early  Christian  martyrs.  The  declara- 
tions which  they  maintained  at  the  peril  and  cost  of 
their  lives  were  not  dogmatic  articles  of  faith,  but 
statements  of  alleged  facts,  of  which  they  professed 
to  have  been  eye  and  ear  witnesses.  Foremost 
among  these  facts  was  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  from 
the  dead.  That  they  believed  themselves  witnesses 
of  the  reality  of  his  death  and  of  his  reappearance 
among  the  living,  there  cannot  be  the  slightest  doubt. 
This  Eenan  admits.  He  maintains  that  Jesus  really- 
died;  that  tlie  apostles  caught  eagerly  at  the  first 
rumor  of  his  resurrection,  which  grew  from  the  steal- 
ing of  his  body  (it  is  hard  to  say  by  whom,  but  more 
probably  by  Joseph  of  Arimathea  than  by  any  one 
else) , and  from  Mary  Magdalene’s  mistaking  the  gar- 
dener for  him  in  the  dim  dawn  and  through  the  mist 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 


203 


of  her  tears ; that  they  so  firmly  believed  this  story 
as  to  imagine  that  they  saw  him  repeatedly,  by  day 
as  well  as  by  night,  at  Jerusalem  and  in  Galilee,  the 
whole  eleven  of  them  at  a time ; and  that  this  hallu- 
cination lasted  many  days,  and,  on  one  occasion, 
extended  to  the  more  than  five  hundred  brethren 
mentioned  by  St.  Paul.  He  says  emphatically  that 
had  the  apostles  possessed  less  than  the  strongest 
assurance  of  their  Master’s  resurrection,  they  could 
not  by  any  possibility  have  been  the  earnest  propa- 
gandists and  heroic  sufferers  that  they  undoubtedly 
were.  We  thank  him  for  this  admission  ; and  indeed 
no  champion  of  the  Christian  faith  can  ask  for  a 
firmer  basis  for  his  superstructure  of  argument  and 
evidence  than  the  concessions  made  all  along  by  this 
pre-eminently  fair  and  frank,  yet  for  all  this  only  the 
more  captivating  and  dangerous,  Coryplneus  of  the 
anti-Christian  host. 

But  the  undoubting  belief  of  professed  eye  and 
ear  witnesses  is  not  in  itself  sufficient  to  inspire  con- 
fidence in  their  story.  If  these  men  were  fools  or 
fanatics,  their  testimony,  though  blood-sealed,  is  of 
no  value.  The  question  for  us  then  is,  whether  they 
were  persons  of  sufficiently  acute  perceptions,  clear 
mind,  and  sound  judgment,  to  be  relied  on. 

To  answer  this  question,  let  us  look  first  at  their 
writings.  Five  of  them,  Matthew,  John,  James, 
Peter,  and  Jude,  are  among  the  reputed  authors  of 
the  New  Testament.  As  to  these  writers,  we  have 
as  good  reason  for  believing  in  the  genuineness  of 
Matthew’s  and  John’s  Gospels,  of  John’s  First 
Epistle,  and  of  Peter’s  First  Epistle,  as  we  have  for 


204 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


believing  in  the  genuineness  of  Virgil’s  Georgies, 
or  of  Cicero,  de  Officiis.  We  find  them,  from  the  ear- 
liest mention  made  of  them,  named  and  quoted  as 
written  by  their  now  reputed  authors,  without  any 
record  or  intimation  of  a doubt  or  question  as  to  their 
authorship. 

I am  aware,  indeed,  that  rationalistic  criticism  does 
not  admit  that  the  Gospels  came  into  being  as  other 
books  do.  The  development  theory  is  applied  to 
them,  as  to  the  whole  realm  of  living  nature.  Their 
genesis  is  like  Topsy’s,  in  Mrs.  Stowe’s  tale,  — "I 
’spect  I grow’d,  don’t  think  nobody  never  made  me.” 
But  Renan  admits  that  memoranda  of  our  Saviour’s 
discourses  written  out  by  Matthew  were  the  nucleus 
of  the  Gospel  which  bears  his  name.  He  thinks, 
too,  that  the  narrative  portions  of  John’s  Gospel, 
which  he  regards  as  singularly  truthlike  and  accu- 
rate, were  derived  from  that  Apostle,  and  that  the 
whole  book  was  written  by  his  immediate  disciples. 

Here  let  me  ofier  some  considerations  with  special 
reference  to  the  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 
As  I have  said,  the  testimony  of  antiquity  that  it 
was  written  by  John,  is  unanimous  and  full.  As  to 
his  having  written  the  Apocalypse,  that  testimony  is 
less  clear  and  conclusive.  Yet  the  critics  of  the 
, Tubingen  school  maintain  that  this  last  book  was 
undoubtedly  written  by  the  Apostle  John.  But  it  is 
very  certain  that  the  same  man  wrote  the  Gospel  of 
John  (so-called),  the  first  Epistle  bearing  his  name, 
and  the  Apocalypse  ; for  there  are  several  very  strik- 
ing characteristic  conceptions  and  figures,  which  are 
both  peculiar  and  common  to  these  three  writings,  or 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


205 


to  the  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse.  For  instance,  the 
term  Logos  (the  Word)  is  applied  to  Jesus  in  all 
three  of  them,  and  nowhere  else;  and  again,  Jesus 
is  introduced  in  the  Gospel  under  the  figure  of  a 
lamb;  the  same  figure  reappears  in  the  Apocalypse,  in 
almost  every  vision  of  the  glorified  Redeemer,  and 
he  is  called  by  this  name  nowhere  else.  These  are 
but  two  instances,  to  which  several  others  might  be 
added,  of  peculiarities  common  to  the  Gospel  and 
the  Apocalypse,  and  rendering  it  very  certain,  that 
if  the  Tubingen  critics  do  not  err  in  ascribing  the 
latter  to  John,  he  must  have  written  the  former. 

Yet  another  consideration  strikes  me  very  forcibly 
in  favor  of  the  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel  by 
John.  True  or  false,  this  is  the  most  remarkable 
book  ever  written,  and  has  had  more  power  over  the 
human  mind  and  heart  than  any  other,  both  in 
determining  belief,  and  in  awakening  tender,  pro- 
found, and  fervent  devotion.  The  sublimest  narrative 
ever  written  is  that  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus.  The 
words  put  into  the  mouth  of  Jesus  in  that  scene,  ''I 
am  the  resurrection  and  the  life;  he  that  believeth 
in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live,  and 
whoso  liveth,  and  believeth  in  me,  shall  never  die,” 
are  the  grandest  utterance  ever  heard  on  earth,  and 
must  and  wdll  be  rehearsed  in  hope  and  triumph,  by 
the  graveside,  till  the  last  of  the  dying  shall  have 
put  on  immortality.  The  recorded  communings  and 
intercessions  of  the  night  of  the  betrayal  surpass  in 
every  element  of  pathos  all  human  literature  beside, 
and  there  at  this  and  at  every  moment,  all  the  world 
over,  thousands  upon  thousands  of  the  weary  and 


206 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


grief-stricken,  who,  oft  as  they  read  these  blessed 
words,  feel  pillowed  on  the  bosom  of  Infinite  Love. 

Now,  there  are  but  two  hypotheses  possible.  One 
is,  that  we  have  the  faithful  narrative  of  what  was  said 
and  done  by  the  Truth  and  Life  incarnate,  transmit- 
ted to  us  by  the  hand  of  one  who  saw  and  heard 
what  he  vrrote.  If  this  be  so,  while  it  makes  no 
manner  of  difference  which  of  the  apostles  wrote  the 
book,  no  one  would  venture  to  doubt  its  having  been 
written  by  John.  The  other  supposition  is,  that  the 
author  of  this  Gospel,  by  his  own  genius,  without  a 
copy,  shaped  and  filled  out  in  those  transcendently 
glorious  and  beautiful  proportions  and  tints  the  figure 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  from  his  own  fertile  brain  spun 
those  discourses  into  whose  depth  none  can  enter 
without  seeming  to  listen  to  the  very  voice  of  God. 
If  this  be  true,  then  the  author  of  that  book  deserves 
the  place  in  human  gratitude,  reverence,  nay,  adora- 
tion, which  the  Christian  Church  has  assigned  to 
J esus.  He  towers  up  above  all  other  writers,  all  other 
men  of  his  age  ; nay  more,  as  the  greatest  mind,  the 
greatest  soul  of  his  race.  The  book  is,  indeed,  su- 
perhuman, if  he  whom  it  portrays  was  not  so.  How 
then  could  the  name  of  such  a writer  have  been  lost, 
and  his  fame  transferred  to  another  ? It  was  a name 
too  great  to  perish,  a fame  too  exalted  not  to  have  its 
enduring  record.  We  are  then  compelled  to  accept 
as  our  only  alternative,  our  first  supposition,  — the 
belief  resting  on  unbroken  tradition  from  the  earliest 
times,  that  this  book,  great  and  glorious  as  it  is,  was 
written  by  an  illiterate  Galilean  fisherman,  and  that  it 
owes  its  superiority  to  all  other  books,  not  to  any 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


207 


surpassing  ability  of  the  author,  but  to  the  Divine 
life  in  human  form,  as  to  which  he  only  related  what 
had  been  uttered  in  his  presence,  or  done  under  his 
personal  knowledge. 

As  for  the  Epistle  bearing  the  name  of  James,  we 
have  evidence  that  it  was  generally  received  as  gen- 
uine, and  was  from  a very  early  period  read  in  the 
churches.  As  of  the  two  apostles  bearing  that  name, 
the  brother  of  John  died  early,  this  letter  must  be 
ascribed  to  James,  the  son  of  Alphseus.  We  have 
about  the  same  kind  and  nearly  the  same  degree  of 
evidence,  for  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle  called 
that  of  Jude,  or  Judas, — evidence  which  would 
be  deemed  amply  sufficient  for  any  book  outside  of  the 
sacred  canon.  The  epistles  of  James  and  Jude  have 
also  characteristics  of  style  and  sentiment  which  ally 
them  to  the  undoubtedly  genuine  epistles  of  John 
and  Peter,  and  show  that  they  belong  to  the  earliest 
time  and  the  apostolic  school,  and  not  to  the  next  suc- 
ceeding Christian  age,  whose  few  extant  writings  are 
of  quite  a different  type. 

We  have  then,  undoubtedly,  in  our  hands  the 
writings  of  some  of  those  men,  who,  at  the  risk  of 
everything  earthly,  professed  to  have  been  eye-wit- 
nesses of  what  Jesus  said  and  did.  How  do  they 
write?  Like  intelligent,  sober,  credible  men?  Or 
do  they  in  their  writings  show  themselves  so  stupid 
and  foolish,  or  so  wild  and  fanatical,  that  they  could 
easily  have  been  the  dupes  of  pretension  or  impos- 
ture ? This  question  would  seem  to  be  answered  by 
the  regard  which  has  been  paid  to  their  writings  in 
every  subsequent  age  by  the  foremost  men  in  point 


208 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 


of  intelligence,  good  sense,  and  culture.  These 
writers  Jiave  generally  been  supposed,  in  Christen- 
dom, to  have  been  specially  enlightened  and  inspired 
by  God.  Whether  this  be  so  or  not,  it  is  aside  from 
our  present  purpose  to  inquire ; but  the  fact  that  such 
an  opinion  concerning  them  has  been  held  by  a large 
proportion  of  the  first  minds  of  our  race  is  a sufll- 
cient  proof  that  their  writings  are  at  least  free  from 
the  tokens  of  weakness,  folly,  or  infatuation. 

This  view  of  their  character  is  certainly  confirmed  ' 
on  examination.  The  books  present  all  the  marks 
of  truth,  when  tried  by  the  usual  tests.  The  Gospels 
of  Matthew  and  John  contain  a great  many  names, 
dates,  local  and  historical  references  ; it  was  a period 
of  very  frequent  change  in  the  political  relations  of 
Palestine,  — a period  as  to  which  later  writers  would 
inevitably  have  committed  gross  anachronisms  ; yet 
we  find  in  these  books  only  the  closest  accordance, 
in  geography,  chronology,  and  history,  with  all  the 
authorities  of  the  time,  especially  with  the  minute 
and  circumstantial  history  of  Josephus.  Then,  too, 
we  have  between  the  Epistles  and  the  Gospels,  just 
the  kind  of  coincidences  which  we  should  expect  to 
trace  in  genuine  works.  Thus  we  find  in  the  Epistles 
not  any  formal  statement  of  facts,  or  set  rehearsal 
of  the  words  of  Jesus  ; but  we  detect  in  them  unmis- 
takable tokens  of  firm  belief  in  the  contents  of  the 
Gospels,  and  what  is  more,  of  precisely  the  condition 
of  mind  and  character  which  these  contents  were 
adapted  to  produce.  The  coincidences  between  the 
Gospels  and  the  Epistles  are  closely  analogous  to 
those  which  we  should  expect  to  find  betweeji  the 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


209 


domestic  or  friendly  letters  of  statesmen  or  generals 
concerned  in  either  war  of  our  independence  and 
authentic  histories  of  the  same  war. 

Then,  again,  there  are  no  books  in  the  world  that 
show  greater  serenity  and  clearness  of  mind  than 
these  manifest.  Their  style  is  simple,  artless,  free 
from  exaggeration,  hyperbole,  apostrophe,  decla- 
mation, ambitious  rhetoric,  outbursts  of  impetuous 
feeling.  Matthew  and  John,  in  describing  the  mar- 
vellous life  and  works  of  Jesus  Christ,  write  as  quietly 
and  dispassionately  as  if  they  were  narrating  ordinary 
events.  They  show  no  fear  that  they  shall  not  be 
believed.  They  use  no  forms  of  strong  asseveration. 
In  fine,  they  write  as  if  they  had  become  so  accus- 
tomed to  experiences  on  a higher  plane  than  that  of 
common  humanity,  as  to  be  unconscious  of  their 
position,  — just  as  natives  of  Switzerland  might  talk 
and  write  calmly  and  unexcitedly  about  glaciers  and 
avalanches,  and  scenes  of  which  the  mere  thought 
thrills  us  with  profound  emotion. 

The  Epistle  of  James  is  a very  remarkable  com- 
position. Had  it  come  down  to  us,  with  such  slight 
verbal  changes  as  might  have  been  necessary,  as  a 
treatise  of  Plutarch,  or  Epictetus,  or  Marcus  Anto- 
ninus, it  would  now  be  regarded  as  the  finest  ethical 
monument  of  antiquity,  and  would  hold  an  unrivalled 
place  as  a school  and  college  classic.  For  common 
sense,  shrewd  observation  of  men  and  things,  deep 
insight,  and  practical  wisdom  of  the  highest  order, 
it  may  resign  all  vantage-ground  on  the  score  of  any 
sacred  associations,  and  still  retain  its  prestige  unim- 
paired ; while  it  is  no  less  remarkable  for  the  sharp 


210 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 


edge  and  keen  point  and  brilliant  sheen  of  many  of 
its  single  maxims  and  apophthegms. 

I have  said  enough  about  these  writings  for  my 
present  argument,  — enough  to  show  you  that  at 
least  those  of  the  apostles  whom  we  know  as  authors 
were  not  feeble,  silly,  credulous  men,  who  could  have 
been  easily  deceived  by  an  impostor,  or  drawn  by  a 
self-deluded  pretender  into  the  vortex  of  his  fanati- 
cism ; but  that  they  were  clear-headed,  sober-minded, 
intelligent,  and  in  every  way  competent  witnesses  of 
the  events  which  some  of  them  record  as  from  their 
own  personal  knowledge,  and  the  others  recognize  as 
undoubted  facts. 

Let  us  now  take  note  of  the  professions  of  the 
apostles,  so  far  as  they  are  specified  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. Six  of  them,  perhaps  more,  were  fishermen 
on  the  little  lake  of  Galilee,  — not  sailors  in  any 
large  sense  of  the  word  (for  they  were  probably 
never  out  of  sight  of  land,  or  in  their  boats  for  more 
than  a day  at  a time) , so  that  there  was  nothing  in 
their  simple,  prosaic  life  to  nurture  the  imaginative 
element,  or  to  cherish  credulity  and  superstition,  but 
much  that  was  adapted  to  educate  their  perceptive 
faculties,  their  powers  of  observation,  and  their 
plain,  practical  common-sense.  Hardy,  straightfor- 
ward, honest  men,  jostled  and  jostling  on  the  rough 
paths  of  daily  life,  the  weaker  sinews  of  character 
broken  down,  the  hardier  developed  by  incessant 
toil,  they  would  have  been  firm  adherents  to  one 
who  could  give  them  unmistakable  credentials  of  his 
claims,  but  not  such  persons  as  could  be  enlisted  in 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


211 


the  cause  of  a fanatic,  or  become  the  easy  dupes  of 
a plausible  deceiver.  We  have  in  the  first  chapter 
of  John’s  Gospel,  in  a series  of  conversations  whose 
life-likeness  Eenan  (in  an  Appendix  to  his  last  edi- 
tion) adduces  as  a token  of  their  authenticity,  a very 
vivid  picture  of  what  these  men  were  before  they 
became  the  disciples  of  Jesus  ; and  the  picture  is  that 
of  self-respecting,  intelligent,  thoughtful  men,  — 
such  men  as  the  Hebrew  theology  and  the  institutions 
of  Moses  were  adapted  to  produce  among  the  labor- 
ing classes,  but  such  as  were  developed  under  no 
other  type  of  ancient  civilization,  nor  have  yet  been 
formed,  except  in  comparatively  small  numbers, 
under  th^  half-Pagan  auspices  of  what  I fear  we  mis- 
call Christian  civilization. 

Of  these  fishermen,  one  indeed,  Peter,  appears  to 
have  been  ardent  and  impulsive  in  his  nature.  But 
it  is  equally  manifest  that  he  was  testy,  petulant, 
captious,  easily  offended,  and  ready  sometimes  even 
to  find  fault  with  his  Master.  Such  a man  as  he 
would  have  been  disgusted  with  sham  and  preten- 
sion. Had  there  been  aught  in  the  works,  words,  or 
daily  life  of  Jesus  that  was  not  genuine,  honest,  pure, 
noble,  he  was  the  very  man  to  take  umbrage  at  it, 
and  to  transmute  his  allegiance  into  implacable 
enmity.  But  his  attachment  flickers  only  for  a few 
moments  under  the  natural  reaction  from  a foolhardy 
courage ; a single  look  from  his  Master  drowns  his 
denial  in  a passion  of  tears  ; and  thenceforward  none 
is  more  prompt  and  earnest  than  he  to  bear  testi- 
mony, at  whatever  cost  and  risk,  to  the  power  aad 
love  of  God  as  incarnate  in  Jesus  Christ. 


212 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


Another  of  the  twelve,  Matthew,  was  a tax-gatherer 
in  the  service  of  the  Eoman  government,  probably  a 
collector  of  the  imposts  on  the  brisk,  though  petty 
inland  traffic  on  the  Lake  of  Galilee, — gathering 
tribute  from  a people  that  scorned  to  pay  it,  and 
sought  every  possible  subterfuge  to  evade  it.  His 
office  could  have  been  borne  only  by  one  who  was  all 
eye  and  ear.  He  was  a detective  by  the  necessity  of 
his  profession,  — the  last  man  to  be  duped  either  by 
fanaticism  or  imposture.  He,  too,  had  more  to  lose 
than  the  fishermen.  The  hands  of  all  the  fiscal  agents 
of  Eome,  great  and  small,  had  viscous  palms ; and 
we  have  intimation  of  diis  substantial  worldly  estate 
in  his  making  a great  feast  for  the  Saviour,  — an 
occasion  important  enough  for  the  Pharisees  to  know 
who  the  guests  were,  and  to  carp  at  them  as  below 
the  standard  of  Jewish  gentility  and  purism.  His 
testimony,  then,  has  a peculiar  value,  both  on  the 
ground  of  his  profession,  and  on  account  of  the  heavy 
sacrifice  which  his  discipleship  made  inevitably 
necessary.  As  for  his  Gospel,  its  entire  character 
accords  closely  with  what  we  know  of  him.  There  is 
something  journal-like  in  its  narrative  portions,  as  if 
it  were  written  by  a man  of  business.  It  contains 
more  about  the  Saviour’s  sayings  and  doings  at  Caper- 
naum — Matthew’s  post  of  duty  — than  either  of  the 
other  Gospels.  Moreover,  when  he  speaks  of  his 
own  house,  he  calls  it  the  house,  as  a man  generally 
does  when  he  has  a place  of  business  separate  from 
his  home.  The  uniform  tradition  of  the  early  church 
represents  his  sacrifice  for  the  cause  of  Christ  as  life- 
long, his  service  as  a missionary  of  the  cross  having 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


213 


been  first,  for  fifteen  years,  in  Judea,  and  afterward  in 
remote  regions  of  the  East,  and  perhaps  of  the  South  ; 
for  there  is  some  reason  to  believe  that  his  Christian 
enterprise  carried  him  as  far  as  Ethiopia. 

Another  of  the  sacred  college  was  Simon,  the 
Canaanite,  as  he  is  called  by  Matthew  and  Mark, 
Zelotes  (or  the  Zealot),  as  Luke  styles  him, — the 
former  being  the  Syro-Chaldaie,  the  latter  the  Greek 
designation  of  a sect  of  Jewish  fanatics,  who  pushed 
their  loyalty  to  the  Mosaic  ritual  and  economy  to 
absolute  frenzy,  regarded  the  Roman  power  with  the 
intensest  hatred,  deemed  murder  and  even  stealthy 
assassination  justifiable  in  defence  of  the  national 
integrity  and  faith,  and  were  the  foremost  agents  in 
producing  the  condition  of  things  which  led  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  exile  of  the  Hebrew 
people, — enormities  opposed  to  the  ordinary  and  else 
invariable  Roman  policy,  but  forced  upon  Titus  by 
the  unparalleled  obstinacy  of  these  very  ultraists  of 
whom  we  so  strangely  find  one  among  the  followers 
of  Jesus  Christ.  The  Zealots  were  literal  inter- 
preters of  the  prophecies  that  seemed  to  promise 
extended  temporal  dominion  to  the  Messiah,  and 
were  in  constant  expectation  of  his  advent.  We 
know  nothing  very  definite  about  this  man’s  subse- 
quent life  ; but  the  tradition  is,  that  he  was  an  inde- 
fatigable propagandist  of  the  new  faith,  and  that  he 
finally  suffered  death  on  the  cross. 

That  a man  of  this  sort  should  have  been  among 
the  apostles  indicates,  as  it  seems  to  me,  the  reality 
of  the  coincidence,  claimed  by  the  Evangelists,  be- 


214 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


tween  the  Messiah  of  the  prophets  and  Jesns  of 
Nazareth.  This  man  was  one  of  those  who  were  all 
the  time  watching  the  Eastern  sky  for  the  dawn  of 
the  Messianic  day,  and  that  a day,  as  they  imagined, 
of  vengeance  and  of  victory.  There  was  not  a pro- 
phetic sign  with  which  he  was  not  familiar ; but  only 
a convergence  of  these  signs  too  patent  and  too  full 
to  admit  of  doubt,  could  have  made  a Zealot  acknowl- 
edge a Messiah  in  every  feature  so  utterly  unlike 
the  mailed  and  harnessed  chieftain  of  his  day- 
dreams. 

This  is  a point  which  seems  to  me  deser^diig  of 
more  than  a passing  notice.  The  evangelists  relate 
numerous  circumstances  of  birthplace,  birth,  parent- 
age, condition,  and  experience,  in  which  prophecy 
concerning  the  Messiah  was  said  to  be  fulfilled  in 
Jesus.  Rationalistic  critics  represent  these  coinci- 
dences as  in  part  factitious,  and  in  part  fictitious. 
They  allege  that  Jesus  did  some  things,  in  order  to 
simulate  the  Messiah  of  the  prophets  ; and  that,  as  to 
the  greater  number  of  those  particulars  in  which  he 
could  have  had  no  agency,  as  about  his  birth  in  Beth- 
lehem and  his  descent  from  David,  the  evangelists 
coined  facts  in  accordance  with  predictions.  It  might 
seem  sufficient  to  say  that,  as  the  coiners  of  these 
coincidences  risked  their  lives  by  coining  them,  they 
must,  before  undertaking  thus  to  deceive  the  world, 
have  accomplished  the  more  difficult  task  of  deceiv- 
ing themselves.  But  here  we  have  a specially  strong 
case.  A man  pledged  at  once  to  the  most  literal 
interpretj;ition  of  prophecy  and  to  a line  of  conduct 
utterly  opposed  to  the  spirit  and  character  of  Jesus 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


215 


is  so  impressed  with  the  Messianic  tokens  that  meet 
in  Jesus,  as  to  throw  aside  his  old  sectarian  convic- 
tions, to  renounce  his  former  self,  to  become  a new 
man,  and  to  adhere  in  life  and  death  to  a Teacher  and 
Leader  with  whom  at  the  outset  he  could  have  had 
nothing  in  common  except  reverence  for  the  Word 
of  God  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

We  come  next  to  the  case  of  Thomas.  He  was 
evidently  sceptical  by  nature, — I would  even  say,  by 
the  grace  and  gift  of  God,  who  evidently  made  use 
of  this  trait  in  his  mental  character  for  the  strength- 
ening of  his  own  faith,  and  of  that  of  multitudes  who 
should  come  after  him.  The  other  ten  have  seen  the 
risen  Lord,  and  have  no  doubt  of  his  identity.  He 
very  naturally  thinks  it  more  probable  that  they  have 
been  deceived  by  some  family  likeness  or  casual 
resemblance  in  another  person  than  that  the  Crucified 
is  really  alive.  He  demands  to  examine  the  wound- 
marks,  to  trace  the  prints  of  the  nails,  the  incision 
made  by  the  spear.  He  was  in  the  right.  His  was 
an  honest  and  reasonable  doubt,  and  we  are  thankful 
for  it.  His  name  should  never  be  spoken  with  less 
than  the  highest  honor,  and  had  he  been  the  type  of 
a larger  proportion  of  those  ministers  of  religion  who 
have  been  successors  of  the  apostles,  there  would  be 
much  less  of  infidelity  than  there  now  is.  Credulity 
generates  unbelief ; and  infidelity  has  no  weapons  of 
its  own  forging  that  have  half  the  efficacy  of  those 
which  it  picks  up  among  the  crazy  outworks,  built  by 
a fiiith  both  blind  and  timid,  around  the  impregnable 
citadel  of  everlasting  truth. 


216  THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  scepticism, — that  of  the 
heart  and  that  of  the  iiltellect.  The  former  is  adapted 
to  make  unbelievers  ; the  latter,  to  make  Christians. 
The  former  will  not  look  at  the  hands  and  the  side, 
because  it  is  determined  not  to  be  moved  morally  and 
spiritually  as  they  would  move  the  honest  soul ; the 
latter  insists  on  seeing  the  wound-marks,  because  it 
wants  to  know  the  precise  truth,  and  therefore  avails 
itself  of  whatever  evidence  God  has  given.  The 
scepticism  of  the  heart  hates  the  light,  and  will  not 
come  to  the  light,*  lest  its  deeds  be  reproved.  The. 
scepticism  of  the  mind  is  that  which  cannot  believe 
without  sufficient  evidence.  It  proves  all  things,  and 
holds  fast  that  which  will  stand  the  test.  It  examines 
both  sides  of  a question,  and  adheres  to  that  which 
imposes  the  least  strain  on  its  belief.  Such  a mind 
needs  only  to  have  the  evidences  of  Christianity  fairly 
presented,  to  yield  to  it  entire  and  cordial  faith.  Many 
of  the  firmest  believers,  many  of  the  ablest  defenders 
of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  belong  to  this  class  of 
minds.  In  this  sense,  Lardner,  Paley,  and  Butler, 
whose  contributions  to  the  Christian  evidences  are 
invaluable,. and  will  be  so  for  generations  to  come, 
were  pre-eminently  sceptics.  They  would  not  believe, 
without  examining  the  hands  and  the  side,  trying  all 
the  witnesses,  testing  the  objections  against  Chris- 
tianity with  the  opposing  arguments,  weighing  coolly 
and  impartially  the  evidence,  real  or  pretended,  on 
either  side ; and  the  result  was  a faith  in  Christ, 
which  sight  could  hardly  have  rendered  clearer  or 
stronger. 

God  has  made  many  such  minds,  and  they  are 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


217 


among  the  noblest  and  best  of  his  creation.  I have 
known,  you  probably  have,  some  extreme  specimens 
of  this  kind  among  the  most  loyal  and  exemplary 
Christians.  Take  a case  like  this, — I paint  from 
life, — an  individual  as  the  type  of  a class.  He  whom 
I describe  wants  for  every  item  of  his  belief  a solid 
basis  of  fact,  and  a superstructure  of  unanswerable 
reasoning  built  upon  it;  and  he  will  let  his  faith 
reach  no  higher  than  he  can  lay  this  superstructure, 
as  it  were,  stone  upon  stone  in  insoluble  cement. 
He  has  no  relish  (and  I think  him  wrong  there)  for 
those  speculations  about  spiritual  and  heavenly 
things,  in  which  from  a mere  hint  of  holy  writ,  fancy 
takes  her  flight  in  those  higher  regions  of  thought, 
which,  I believe,  God  has  purposely  left  undescribed, 
that  we  may  have  our  free  range  in  them.  In  the 
house  built  on  Christ  as  the  foundation,  he  prefers  to 
live  in  the  lower  story,  where  he  can  test  the  strength 
of  the  floor  and  the  walls.  But  so  firmly  has  he  by 
careful  examination  convinced  himself  of  the  Saviour’s 
redeeming  mission,  sacrificial  death,  miracles,  resur- 
rection and  ascension,  that  he  speaks  of  them  as  he 
would  of  sunrise,  or  the  phases  of  the  moon,  or  any 
of  the  well-known  phenomena  of  the  outward  world, 
as  matters  long  since  placed  by  him  beyond  question. 
He  conforms  his  life  to  these  great  spiritual  facts,  as 
he  does  to  the  laws  of  nature.  And  when  he  comes 
to  die,  he  passes  away,  not  with  any  glow  of  ecstasy, 
but  with  the  quiet  confidence  of  one  who  knows  just 
where  he  is  going,  and  has  just  as  firm  a belief  in 
the  many  mansions  in  the  Father’s  house  as  in  the 
several  apartments  in  his  own  house.  This  is  the 


218 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 


style  of  faith  that  gi’ows  from  the  honest  scepticism 
which  insists  on  always  having  sufficient  reasons  for 
its  belief.  It  often  has  less  unction  than  might  seem 
edifying ; but  if  you  want  valiant  soldiers  of  the  cross 
for  times  when  unbelief  is  rampant,  boastful,  and 
aggressive,  these  are  the  men  to  bear  the  shock  of 
arms,  and  come  off  more  than  conquerors. 

We  care  not,  then,  how  many  there  are  of  the 
same  order  of  mind  with  Thomas.  The  condition  of 
the  Christian  evidences  is  specially  adapted  to  their 
natures.  The  infidel  has  much  harder  things  to 
believe  than  the  Christian,  severer  difficulties  to 
encounter,  contradictions,  inconsistencies  and  absurd- 
ities which  only  a credulous  mind  could  entertain, 
— from  which  a natively  sceptical  intellect  is  inev- 
itably drawn  into  the  Christian  faith.  For,  if  Chris- 
tianity be  not  true,  we  have  to  believe  in  numerous 
well-known  effects  without  any  adequate  cause ; in 
extensive  conditions  of  mind  and  of  conviction  for 
which  there  was  no  basis  whatever ; in  the  growing 
up  of  confessedly  the  most  perfect  system  of  morality 
the  world  has  ever  seen,  in  the  brain  of  an  illiterate 
Galilean  peasant,  in  a degenerate  nation  aind  a corrupt 
age,  and  not  only  so,  but  in  the  brain  of  one  who 
was  either  weak  enough  to  imagine,  or  wicked  enough 
to  feign,  himself  possessed  of  supernatural  powers ; 
in  the  simultaneous  illusion  of  the  senses  of  multi- 
tudes and  bodies  of  men  for  many  successive  days, 
when  it  was  the  interest  and  the  wish  of  those  very 
men  to  find  that  false  which  they  were  constrained  to 
recognize  as  true  ; in  the  imposition  of  pretended  or 
imagined  miracles  upon  a hostile  people,  so  success- 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


219 


fully  that  they  were  compelled  to  admit  their  actual 
occurrence,  and  (as  we  have  abundant  Jewish  evi- 
dence) imputed  them  to  the  aid  of  Beelzebub,  the 
imagined  prince  of  demons  ; and  in  many  other  things 
equally  incredible  and  opposed  to  all  recognized  laws 
of  belief.  The  fact  is,  that  not  a few  of  the  most 
noted  infidels  of  modern  times  have  been  equally 
noted  for  their  credulity ; and  that  at  the  present 
moment  the  superstitions  hardly  less  gross  than  feti- 
chism,  which  are  connected  with  pseudo-spiritualism, 
are  most  rife  in  the  very  quarters  where  the  miracles 
and  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  are  thrown  aside  as 
unworthy  of  credence. 

One  word  more  about  the  eleven,  before  I pass  to 
the  twelfth.  These  eleven,  it  must  be  remembered, 
were  not  only  witnesses  of  leading  events  in  the  life 
of  Jesus,  but  were  for  many  months  his  constant 
companions,  on  the  road,  in  the  house,  on  the  lake. 
They  knew  his  whole  manner  of  life,  — r his  modes  of 
intercourse  with  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men,  — 
the  degree  to  which  he  embodied  his  precepts  of 
piety,  purity,  justice,  forbearance,  and  kindness  in 
his  daily  walk  and  conversation.  They  staked  their 
lives  on  a body  of  statements,  prominent  among 
which  was  the  alleged  fact  of  his  faultless  and  abso- 
lutely godlike  sanctity  and  excellence.  They  must 
have  known  whether  this  was  true  or  not ; and  that 
they  suffered  and  died  to  attest  it,  proves  that  they 
knew  it  to  be  true. 

I have  spoken  of  eleven  only.  There  remains 


220 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


D^udas,  by  far  the  most  important  of  all,  for  whom  the 
Church  has  been  slow  to  own  her  debt  of  everlasting 
gratitude  to  the  God  who  makes  the  wrath  and  guilt 
of  man  to  praise  him.  Judas  had  the  same  oppor- 
tunities with  the  other  eleven  for  knowing  everything 
about  his  Master  that  could  be  known.  He  was 
employed  in  a confidential  relation,  as  custodian  of 
the  scanty  funds  of  the  apostolic  family.  He  was 
probably  from  the  first  a selfish,  greedy,  deceitful 
man ; our  Saviour  early  and  repeatedly  intimates  his 
recognition  of  these  traits ; and  he  probably  chose 
him  on  account  of  them,  that  if  malice  itself  could 
find  aught  against  him,  it  might  have  free  scope  and 
full  swing. 

Judas  entered  into  negotiations  with  the  chief 
priests  and  their  associates  for  the  ruin  of  his  Mas- 
ter, and,  mercenary  as  he  was,  he  would  certainly 
have  efiectod  that  ruin  in  the  way  most  profitable  to 
himself.  Now  it  was  only  as  a last  resort  that  the 
leading  Jews  wanted  to  get  possession  of  the  body 
of  Jesus.  They  felt  by  no  means  certain  that  they 
could  persuade  Pilate  to  kill  him,  and  they  dared  not 
kill  him  themselves.  They  would  have  immeasurably 
preferred  to  destroy  his  influence,  to  detect  some  im- 
posture in  his  alleged  miracles,  or  to  find  some  weak 
point  in  his  character,  some  damning  incident  in  his 
life.  They  were  so  doubtful  how  they  could  dispose 
of  their  prisoner,  that  they  offered  a very  low  price 
for  him.  But  they  had  large  means  at  their  com- 
mand, and  would  have  given  a much  greater  reward 
for  a surer  service.  Could  Judas  have  gone  to  those 
men  with  evidence  of  jugglery,  pretence,  or  exagger- 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


221 


atioii  in  the  wonderful  works  reported  to  have  l3ecn 
wrought  by  Jesus,  or  could  he  have  proved  a single 
deed  or  utterance  that  would  impair  the  reputation 
of  perfect  sanctity  which  Jesus  held  among  a large 
portion  of  the  people ; in  fine,  could  he  have  borne 
the  slightest  testimony  against  his  Master’s  character, 
he  might  as  easily  as  not  have  made  his  thirty  pieces 
of  silver  three  thousand,  — he  might  have  named  his 
own  price,  and  if  there  had  not  been  money  enough 
in  hand,  they  would  have  taken  up  contributions  in  all 
the  synagogues  to  pay  it.  But  there  was  absolutely 
nothing  secret  which  could  injure  Jesus  and  his  cause 
by  being  made  known.  There  was  nothing  for  this 
bad  man  to  betray  except  the  place  in  the  environs 
of  the  crowded  city  where  Jesus  was  going  to  pass 
the  night,  — it  being  necessary  to  arrest  him  by 
night,  on  account  of  the  large  number  of  friendly 
Galileans  who  would  have  resisted  any  attempt  to 
apprehend  him  by  daylight.  For  this  mean  and 
paltry  service  he  had  a commensurately  pitiful  com- 
pensation. 

But  even  he  repents  of  what  he  has  done.  The 
power  and  beauty  of  that  blessed  spirit,  the  majesty, 
meekness,  and  love  of  that  holy  countenance  come 
over  him,  but  too  late  to  recall  his  deed.  He  seeks, 
as  so  many  do  in  all  times,  in  our  time,  to  escape 
the  contamination  of  ill-gotten  gain  by  casting  it  into 
the  temple-treasury;  and  finding  no  relief,  in  an 
agony  of  remorse  and  despair  he  goes  and  hangs  him- 
self, bearing  as  unequivocal  and  precious  testimony 
to  the  truth  and  purity  of  his  Master  in  that  horrible 
suicide,  as  the  other  apostles  bore  in  their  cheerful 


222 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES. 


sufferings  and  martyrdom  for  the  love  of  their 
ascended  Lord. 

Judas  has  been  strangely  overlooked  by  the  Church ; 
no  day  is  assigned  to  him  in  the  calendar ; no  account 
is  taken  of  his  services ; — yet  we  could  have  better 
spared  a better  man.  We  thank  God  for  the  life- 
record  of  those  of  the  sacred  college  who  followed 
closest  in  the  footsteps  of  their  Lord ; yet  while  we 
have  the  Master,  we  might  not  have  missed  even 
James,  or  Peter,  or  Nathaniel.  But  we  do  need 
Judas,  to  learn  what  aspect  the  Saviour  manifested 
to  a subtle,  captious,  and  treacherous  witness,  and 
thus  to  have  the  testimony  of  the  vilest  avarice, 
meanness,  and  malice,  alongside  with  that  of  God  and 
the  holy  angels,  to  the  truth  of  his  claims-;  the  guile- 
lessness of  his  spirit,  the  purity  of  his  life. 

I have  thus  presented  the  evidences  of  our 
Saviour’s  Divine  mission  and  character  afforded  us  by 
those  of  whom  the  Evangelist  writes,  "He  ordained 
twelve,  that  they  should  be  with  him.”  In  transmit- 
ting to  us  their  testimony,  he  has  ordained  us  also, 
that  we  should  be  with  him.  This  is  the  place  to 
which  Jesus  calls  us  and  heaven  invites  us.  Be  it 
our  place  ; and  may  it  be  our  blessedness  so  to  con- 
fess him  in  our  earthly  lives  and  before  men,  that  we 
may  be  owned  of  him  in  heaven,  before  the  angels 
of  God. 


VIII. 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE  RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS 
CHRIST. 

BY  REV.  KINSLEY  TWINING,  CAMBRIDGE,  MASS. 

riHHE  subject  on  which  I am  to  address  you  is  the^^ 
JL  evidence  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ* 
We  are,  therefore,  to  occupy,  for  the  time  being,  ^ 
position  against  which  the  utmost  violence  of  sceptic 
cal  assault  has  been  directed.  ' 

It  has  not  escaped  the  sharp  eye  of  rationalism, 
that  while  the  great  miracle  of  the  resurrection 
remains  unshaken,  it  would  be  of  small  account  to 
throw  doubt  on  the  others.  They  cannot  be  dis- 
credited while  the  principle  involved  in  them  all  is 
perfectly  upheld  bj'  the  unimpeachable  fact  which  is 
to  pass  under  our  review.  Scepticism  has  therefore 
omitted  no  pains  to  deprive  Christianity  of  this  capi- 
tal fact  in  its  defence ; while  believers,  with  a still 
deeper  sense  of  its  vital  importance,  have  clung  to  it 
as  the  critical  fact  on  which  Christianity  depends. 
''If  Christ  be  not  risen,”  says  Paul,  "then  is  our 
preaching  vain,  and  your  faith  is  also  vain.” 

It  was  therefore  to  be  expected,  that  here,  on  this 
ground,  the  battle  of  Christianity  would  be  fought. 
And  here  it  has  been  fought : first,  against  the 
Pharisees,  who  admitted  that  God  might  raise  the 

223 


224 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


dead,  but  denied  that  he  had  so  raised  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  ; and  next  against  the  Sadducee  and  the 
Pagan,  who,  like  the  modern  school  of  doubt,  op- 
posed the  evidence  of  such  an  event  having  occurred 
with  the  a priori  dogma  of  the  incredibility  of  all 
miracles,  and,  especially,  of  such  a miracle  as  the 
resurrection. 

And  it  is  here,  on  this  ground,  that  the  battle  of 
Christianity  against  the  current  infidelity  will  have 
to  be  fought.  The  resurrection  is  the  great  miracle 
which  settles  the  question  for  the  lesser  ones.  If  we 
must  surrender  this  fact,  nothing  remains  in  Chris- 
tianity to  make  it  worth  a better  defence  than  Judaism 
or  Confucianism  deserve.  Pressens6  once  said,  " If 
the  resurrection  does  not  continue  an  essential  part 
of  Christianity,  it  is  no  longer  worth  while  to  speak 
of  the  rest.”  But  if  it  does,  and  cannot  be  shaken, 
revelation  and  the  Christian  doctrine  of  miracles  have 
a complete  defence  ; and  we  may  safely  leave  the  flings 
at  the  minor  miracles  of  the  Bible,  to  those  who  find 
delight  in  that  kind  of  petty  warfare. 

In  discussing  this  question,  much  depends  on  the 
spirit  in  which  it  is  approached.  The  moral  axioms 
with  which  the  inquiry  is  begun,  decide  where  it  is 
to  end.  The  writers  on  the  sceptical  side  are  care- 
ful to  prepare  their  readers  with  elaborate  introduc- 
tions before  they  admit  them  to  the  facts.  " To 
write  the  history  of  a religion,”  says  Renan,  '^it  is 
necessary,  first,  to  have  believed  it  (without  this,  w^e 
could  not  understand  by  what  it  has  charmed  and 
satisfied  the  human  conscience)  ; in  the  second  place, 
to  believe  it  no  longer  implicitly ; for  implicit  faith 


RESUIUtECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


225 


is  incompatible  with  sincere  history.”  * Amazing  com- 
bination of  a faith  which  has  ceased  to  be  anything, 
with  a doubt  which  is  everything  ! 

We  protest,  in  advance,  against  such  pre-judgment 
of  the  case.  The  question  of  miracles — and  pre- 
eminently the  question  of  the  resurrection — is  one 
of  evidence.  Its  elements  lie  within  the  scope  of 
observation  and  of  knowledge.  There  exists  what 
purports  to  be  a body  of  evidence.  We  simply  insist 
that  this  evidence  should  be  heard.  We  do  not 
object  to  the  appeal  to  a priori  belief  in  studying 
such  a history  as  that  of  the  resurrection.  It  is 
only  the  most  superficial  examiner  who  finds  in  the 
record  nothing  more  than  bare  facts,  and  requires 
nothing  more  to  interpret  them.  We  bring  to  such 
investigations  certain  guiding  ideas  or  presupposi- 
tions, which,  whether  they  are  those  entertained  by 
Mr.  Hume  or  by  Augustus  Neander,  are  equally 
metaphysical  and  theological  in  their  character,  and 
equally  important  in  their  bearing  on  the  question. 
For  example,  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  is  the  strong- 
est possible  assertion  of  the  continuity  and  perma- 
nence of  personal  existence  after  death.  It  is  the 
noblest  triumph  of  spiritual  life  and  power  over  mere 
nature,  and,  as  such,  comes  into  fatal  collision  with 
the  pantheistic  presumptions,  which  have  been  em- 
ployed by  writers  on  that  side  of  the  question  as 
their  chief  reliance  in  the  attack  on  the  facts  which 
prove  the  resurrection  to  have  occurred.  But  if  it 
can  be  shown  that  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead,  this 
evidence  is  not  to  be  ruled  out  by  such  a priori 
* Life  of  Jesus,  introduc.  p.  50. 


X 


226 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


considerations  as  these  authors  may  have  chosen 
to  adopt.  The  resurrection  of  Jesus,  if  proved  to 
be  a fact,  would  be  a standard  by  which  to  try  the 
pantheistic  belief.  The  pantheistic  belief  is  not  to 
'test  the  fact. ' 

Mr.  Hume,  in  his  wonderfully  astute  examination 
of  the  theory  of  miracles,  reaches  the  conclusion  that 
they  are  loaded  with  an  original  improbability  too 
great  for  testimony  to  remove  ; and  around  this  fatal 
presumption  the  German  criticism  of  the  last  fifty 
years  has  revolved.  But  plausible  as  it  appears  in 
itself,  and  decisive  as  it  must  always  be  to  an  athe- 
ist, what  real  force  does  the  argument  carry  with  it 
to  one  who  believes  in  a personal  Deity?  What 
essential  improbability  is  there  that  such  a being 
should  act  miraculously  ? His  divine  personality 
qualifies  him  to  do  so.  The  essence  of  miraculous 
power  is  contained  in  freedom  and  in  personality ; 
and  when  we  have  seen  reason  to  believe  that  the 
world  is  ruled  by  a Being  who  can  act  out  his  will, 
what  so  great  absurdity  in  the  belief  that  he  has  done 
it?  If  there  be  any  absurdity  in  such  a belief,  it 
attaches  originally  not  teethe  miracle,  but  to  the  con- 
ception of  a free  personality  and  of  God  as  possess- 
ing such  a nature.  The  incredibility,  if  there  were 
any,  would  lie  in  theism  and  not  in  the  miracles  which 
theists  have  always  been  so  much  inclined  to  believe 
in.  Mr.  J.  Stuart  Mill,  with  a golden  candor, 
admits  that  while  Hume’s  argument  is  conclusive  to 
an  atheist,  it  fails  to  a theist, — the  power  to  work 
miracles  if  he  will,  being  one  of  the  attributes  essen- 
tial to  the  conception  of  a personal  God. 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


227 


The  criticism  which  denies  the  resurrection,  enters 
V the  field  in  general  on  what  is  virtually  atheistic 
ground.  The  resurrection  is  incredible  to  it,  not 
only  because  it  considers  human  nature  incapable  of 
such  an  experience,  but  because  it  recognizes  no 
divine  being  who  by  any  possibility  could  be  the 
author  of  such  an  event  as  a miracle.  Surely  the 
facts  in  the  case,  if  there  are  any,  are  entitled  to  be 
examined  with  at  least  some  little  chance  left  for  them 
to  tell  on  the  decision. 

In  discussing  this  question,  we  put  it  on  the  broad 
ground  of  theism  as.  against  atheism,  and  claim  for 
the  resurrection  just  that  amount  of  a priori  proba- 
bility or  possibility  which  the  existence  of  a personal 
God  offers  in  favor  of  there  being  such  an  event  as  a 
miracle.  This  is  the  ground  on  which  St.  Paul 
placed  the  question  when  he  argued  it  before  Festus 
and  Agrippa.  ” Why,”  he  asked,  "should  it  be 
thought  a thing  incredible  with  you  that  God  should 
raise  the  dead? ” (Acts  26:8.)  To  the  atheist  there 
is  an  absolute  incredibility  in  such  a thing.  But  with 
the  belief  in  God  the  presumption  changes,  and  the 
probability  that  such  an  event  transpired  is  measured 
exactly  by  the  strength  or  weakness  of  the  evidence 
for  the  existence  of  a personal  deity. 

It  is  but  just  to  add  that  the  fact  itself,  could  it 
be  independently  proved,  would  be  such  an  assertion 
of  the  doctrine  of  theism  against  atheism,  of  person- 
ality against  impersonality,  as  could  not  be  refuted 
in  any  event,  and  would  carry  with  it  a demonstra- 
tion of  our  immortal  hope  and  of  the  truth  of  God. 

From  this  review  of  preliminary  questions,  we  pa^ 


228 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE_ 


to  the  evidence  on  which  faith  in  the  resurrection 
reposes. 

This  evidence  may  be  collected  into  three  groups. 
To  the  first  belongs  the  direct  testimony  of  the  Scrip- 
tures ; to  the  second,  that  which  can  be  drawn  indi- 
rectly from  the  institutions  of  the  church  and  from 
the  facts  of  apostolic  history ; and  to  the  third,  certain 
corroborative  evidence  drawn  from  the  history  of 
Christ’s  life.  We  turn  first  to  the  direct  evidence 
of  Scripture. 

Earliest  of  all  is  that  furnished  by  prophecy.  The 
light  thrown  on  the  subject  from  this  quarter  may 
not  be  of  a*  kind  to  bring  the  surest  conviction  to  the 
sceptic,  and  yet  it  has  a force  which  it  is  not  for  the 
believer  to  overlook.  Not  all  the  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity are  required  for  use  against  rationalism. 
Some  at  least  are  for  the  joy  and  confirmation  of 
believers.  There  is  a value  in  the  biblical  types  and 
predictions  of  the  resurrection,  to  which  even  a sceptic 
might  not  be  wholly  insensible.  But  the  believer  can- 
not willingly  forget  that  his  Saviour,  when  the  resur- 
rection was  an  accomplished  fact,  expounded  to  his  then 
docile  disciples  the  Scriptures  concerning  it.  Both 
Paul  and  Peter  allude  to  them,  and  it  is  beyond  a 
doubt  that  this  view  became  an  important  dogma  of 
the  early  church,  that  Jesus  both  died  and  rose  again 
''  according  to  the  Scriptures.”  It  is  not  possible  in 
so  brief  an  essay  as  the  present,  to  examine  these 
prophetic  passages.  They  are  well  known ; and 
with  regard  to  some  of  tliem  it  may  be  said  that 
although  their  allusion  to  the  resurrection  could  not 
have  been  determined  before  the  event,  at  least  not 


RESURJiECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


229 


by  an  uninspired  mind,  yet  darkling  as  they  were, 
they  had  a considerable  infl  uence  in  preparing  the  way 
for  Christ,  and  when  placed  in  the  reflected  rays  of 
the  resurrection  itself,  add  a new  and  increasing  light 
to  that  which  already  shone  on  the  subject.  The 
risen  Saviour  appealed  to  these  predictions,  not  to 
establish  the  fact  of  his  rising  (for  his  own  incontes- 
table presence  had  removed  that  point  from  the  region 
of  uncertainties) , but  to  explain  it,  and  to  show  that 
his  death  and  reappearance  fell  in  with  the  historic 
plan  of  redemption.  He  was  thus  able  to  satisfy  the 
disciples  that  his  death  and  resurrection  were  not 
an  unforeseen  catastrophe.  This  is  the  light  which 
prophecy  continues  to  shed  on  the  subject ; not 
enough  to  break  through  the  Cimmerian  darkness  of 
absolute  unbelief,  not  enough  to  be  visible  to  an 
eye  dazzled  with  the  splendors  of  rationalism,  but 
fully  enough  to  startle  and  comnland  the  attention 
of  open  minds,  and  to  confirm  those  who  believe. 

We  meet,  next,  the  direct  testimony  of  the  four 
evangelists. 

The  eflforts  that  have  been  made  to  break  down  the 
original  value  of  this  evidence  are  well  known.  The 
books  themselves  have  been  assailed  as  late  and 
nameless  works,  written  we  cannot  say  when,  and 
given  out  by  what  authors  it  is  impossible  to  decide. 
They  have  been  studied  in  all  lights  and  with  every 
possible  spirit,  but  with  the  general  result,  as  we  may 
fairly  claim,  of  throwing  new  light  on  a subject  that 
had  grown  too  obscure,  and  thus  of  making  believing 
scholarship  more  aware  of  the  strength  of  its  case. 
Whatever  else  may  have  been  shaken,  it  is  now  be- 


230 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


lieved  that  the  apostolic  origin  of  the  gospels  can  be 
maintained  as  long  as  the  church  will  keep  herself 
acquainted  with  the  facts  which  these  exhaustive 
discussions  have  elicited.  The  four  accounts  of  the 
resurrection  contained  in  the  Gospels,  come,  there- 
fore, before  us  with  this  high  claim  to  respect, — that 
they  not  only  represent  and  contain  the  tradition  cur- 
rent among  the  apostles,  but  are  themselves  that  tra- 
dition, and  that  one  of  these  accounts  was  written 
wholly  by  an  eye-witness. 

This  external  or  prima  facie  argument  for  the  res- 
urrection, on  the  ground  that  the  four  Gospels  assert 
it,  is  by  no  means  in  so  ruinous  a condition  as  some 
of  our  liberal  friends  imagine.  Neither  Strauss  nor 
Renan  will  venture  to  deny  that  we  have  here  the 
genuine  apostolic  belief  on  this  subject ; and  who  has 
yet  ventured  to  show  that  the  facts  alluded  to  by  St. 
Paul  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  1st  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  do  not  refer  to  several  of  the  identical 
reappearances  of  Jesus  named  by  the  evangelists? 
A notable  change  has  passed  over  rationalistic  criti- 
cism. Fifty  years  ago  it  saw  nothing  better  than 
worthless  rubbish  in  the  four  Gospels.  Their  origin 
was  placed  far  down  in  the  post-apostolic  times  and 
their  historical  character  derided.  Criticism  is  now 
more  respectful,  and  though  it  remains  denial,  it  is 
forced  to  the  reluctant  admission  that  the  apostles 
did  believe  in  the  resurrection,  and  that  at  a very 
early  day.  It  is  a highly  instructive  commentary  on 
the  results  of  the  controversy  to  compare  Strauss’ 
first  edition  with  his  latest  "New  Life  of  Jesus.” 
The  problem  before  the  sceptical  critics  of  the  pres- 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 


231 


ent  time,  is  to  show  how  the  ''  legend  ” of  the  resur- 
rection arose  under  the  eyes  and  ears  of  the  apostles 
themselves  and  came  to  be  honestly  believed  by 
them.  In  other  words,  it  is  to  reconcile  the  honest 
belief  of  the  apostles  with  its  wholly  fictitious  char- 
acter. Accordingly  Baur  stops  short  at  the  admis- 
sion that  the  apostles  believed  in  the  resurrection, 
and  refuses  to  go  further  and  show  how  they  could 
possibly  believe  in  such  an  event  had  it  not  occurred. 
He  tells  us  he  is  investigating  the  origin  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  that  for  this  purpose  the  fact  of  the 
resurrection  is  not  necessary,  — the  belief  in  it  is  all 
that  is  required.  Baur  deceives  himself  by  a name. 
The  Christianity  that  requires  to  be  explained  is  the 
Christianity  of  the  belief  in  the  resurrection^  and  not 
that  which  grew  out  of  this  belief.  If  he  has  ac- 
counted for  the  derived  or  secondary  Christianity  of 
later  times  by  tracing  it  to  this  belief,  let  him  next 
attack  the  real  problem  and  explain  the  original  Chris- 
tianity of  all  as  it  came  forth  in  the  belief  that  Jesus 
rose  from  the  dead.  We  still  think  that  this  belief 
will  prove  to  be  too  closely  identified  with  the  objec- 
tive fact  to  be  detached  from  it.  The  external  or 
jprima  facie  testimony  of  the  Gospels  to  the  resurrec- 
tion, such  as  it  is,  remains,  then,  an  unimpeached 
witness  in  the  case. 

But  the  evidence  of  the  Gospels  has  an  internal 
truthfulness  which  is  much  in  its  favor. 

The  rationalistic  critics  of  these  accounts  have  not 
hesitated  to  apply  to  them  a severe  harmonistic 
method,  the  unreasonableness  of  which  in  the  hands 
of  orthodox  expositors  they  were  themselves  the 
first  to  expose. 


232 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


Some  inexplicable  dilBculties  of  a minor  kind  have 
indeed  been  found  in  the  comparison  of  the  accounts 
with  each  other.  It  has  proved  a matter  of  great 
uncertainty  to  arrange  the  details  of  the  resurrection 
in  a chronological  order.  It  is  not  easy  to  figure  to 
our  minds  the  precise  movements  of  the  actors  in  the 
scene,  nor  to  ascertain  how  their  various  meetings 
with  the  risen  Saviour  combine  together.  There  is 
some  obscurity  in  the  appearance  and  number  of  the 
angels  and  in  the  words  used  on  several  occa- 
sions. Luke  gives  no  intimation  of  the  appearance 
in  Galilee  ; Matthew  and  Mark  are  silent  about  those 
which  took  place  in  Jerusalem.  Only  John  brings 
out  the  mediating  fact  of  appearances  at  different 
times,  both  in  Galilee  and  at  Jerusalem.  The  silence 
and  brevity  of  Mark  might  lead  us  into  the  error  of 
placing  the  ascension  on  the  same  day  in  which  the 
resurrection  occurred.  Thus  these  accounts  in  com- 
parison exhibit  minor  variations,  but  they  all  set  forth 
in  agreement  the  really  important  facts.  Why  should 
trivial  variation  disturb  us?  It  is  a corroboration 
of  the  honesty  of  the  testimony.  It  demonstrates 
that  it  was  brought  together  independently  and  was 
collected  naturally.  Why  are  there  four  to  tell  the 
story,  if  one  could  introduce  nothing  omitted  in  the 
others  ? What  if  Matthew  and  Mark  omit  the  appear- 
ances in  Jerusalem.  They  do  not  deny  them ; and 
Luke  balances  the  accounts  by  omitting  those  in 
Galilee,  while  John  again  harmonizes  them  by  men- 
tioning those  in  both  localities.  What  if  Mark  seems 
to  pass  over  the  forty  days  of  Jesus’  continuance  with 
the  disciples,  and  come  at  once  to  the  ascension? 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 


233 


There  is  nothing  in  this  compendious  silence  to  con- 
tradict the  detailed  explanations  of  Lul^e  and  John ; 
and  moreover  there  is  some  reason  to  suspect  that 
the  original  ending  of  Mark  has  been  lost  and  that  the 
final  chapter,  as  it  stands,  is  only  an  abridged  re- 
statement of  its  contents.  There  is  variation  in  the 
accounts,  and  some  confusion  of  details  and  some 
inexplicable  trifles,  but  nothing  to  afiect  the  absolute 
agreement  of  testimony  to  the  main  events.  Similar 
variations  occur  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament, 
without  impairing  its.  credit.  The  trilingual  inscrip- 
tion over  the  cross  was  written  in  Hebrew,  Greek, 
and  Latin.  Each  of  the  four  Gospels  purports  to 
give  the  Greek  in  which  it  was  written,  but  no  two 
of  these  transcriptions  agree.  Matthew  says,  " This  is 
Jesus  the  king  of  the  Jews”;  Mark,  "The  king  of 
the  Jews  ” ; Luke,  " This  is  the  king  of  the  Jews  ” ; 
and  John,  " Jesus  of  Nazareth  the  king  of  the  Jews.” 
Four  variations  of  the  same  note,  but  one. absolute 
and  consentient  testimony ! There  is  no  more  im- 
portant disagreement  in  the  accounts  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. "Estimated  at  their  proper  value  they  never 
assume  the  importance  of  irreconcilable  contradic- 
tions. They  are  perfectly  naturally  explained  when 
we  remember  that  only  one  of  the  accounts  we  pos- 
sess is  entirely  by  the  hands  of  an  eye-witness.”^  The 
strange  agitation  and  confusion  of  the  disciples  on 
rei^eiving  the  news  from  the  vacant  tomb^L  is  perhaps 
reflected  in  the  partial  disorder  of  the  accounts.  And 
yet  amid  all,  with  how  grand  a consent  come  forth 
the  great  features  of  the  scene  I All  agree  that  Jesus 

*Pressense,  Life  of  Christ,  p.  496. 


2U 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


rose  on  the  morning  of  the  third  day,  and  indicate 
the  time  as  the  earliest  dawn.  The  exact  moment 
may  not  have  been  known,  and  the  slight  oscillation 
that  appears  between  the  account  of  John,  who 
describes  it  as  having  occurred  ” while  it  was  yet 
dark,”  and  Mark,  who  placed  it  at ''  the  rising  of  the 
sun,”  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  no  mortal  eye  beheld 
the  Saviour  issue  from  the  tomb,  and  the  exact 
moment  was  left  to  conjecture.  The  soldiers  saw 
the  angel  descend  in  awful  brightness,  and  this  has 
been  assumed  for  the  moment  of  the  resurrection. 
But  it  may  have  occurred  before.  Unseen  by  mortal 
eyes,  the  body  which  lay  within  the  rock-hewn  tomb, 
watched  over  by  the  power  of  God,  resumed  its  vital 
force.  He  who  had  ''power  to  lay  down  his  life 
and  power  to  take  it  again,”  silently  rose  from  the 
embrace  of  Death,  and  with  an  unhurried  ease,  of 
which  the  napkin  that  was  bound  about  his  head  and 
the  cerements  of  the  grave  laid  away  in  their  place 
remained  a witness,  without  convulsive  effort,  with- 
out "noise  ” or  "cry,”  and  with  "voice  still  unheard 
in  the  streets,”  again  issued  into  the  world,  not  far 
from  that  same  Bethlehem  and  beneath  the  same 
star-lit  sky  which  three  and  thirty  years  before  beheld 
the  equally  silent  and  unnoticed  beginning  of  his 
incarnate  life. 

To  listen  only  to  Strauss,  we  might  imagine  every 
detail  of  one  gospel  neutralized  and  lost  in  the  con- 
tradiction of  the  others,  and  the  whole  account 
reduced  by  successive  disagreements  to  an  impalpable 
ruin.  It  is  then  with  no  little  surprise  that  we  find 
the  ancient  picture  on  which  the  church  has  delighted 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


235 


to  gaze,  so  little  disturbed  by  unfriendly  criticism, 
and  behold  the  old  elements  of  it  reforming  in  better 
order  from  the  facts  which  survive  the  pillage  of  such 
pens.  We  still  see  the  disciples  utterly  dejected  in 
the  long  hours  that  preceded  the  resurrection, — lin- 
gering on  the  old  scene,  assembled  perhaps  in  the 
same  chamber,  whose  walls  still  echoed  with  the 
parting  words  of  the  Crucified, — words  which,  had 
they  been  understood,  might  have  saved  them  all  that 
deep  despair.  We  still  see  the  women  preparing 
funeral  honors,  and  bringing  the  spices  which, 
as  has  been  remarked,*  "were  at  once  the  proof  of 
their  aflfection  and  of  their  unbelief.”  We  see  these 
women  first  at  the  sepulchre,  unable  to  comprehend 
the  testimony  of  the  vacant  tomb  and  of  the  angelic 
messengers.  We  see  them  returning  with  their  new 
wonder  to  the  disciples,  who  refused  to  believe  them. 
We  see  Peter  and  John  running  to  the  sepulchre,  and  ^ 
wondering  there  over  the  unmistakable  evidences  that 
there  had  been  no  haste  nor  violence  in  the  removal 
of  the  sacred  body.  At  last  we  hear  the  sacred  voice 
of  Jesus  himself  breaking  the  oppressive  silence,  and 
breaking  it  in  the  spirit  of  his  whole  life,  with  the 
simple  and  tender  accent  of  a disciple’s  name.  Again 
we  see  him  with  his  people  in  their  safe  retreat, — 
with  them  in  Galilee, — with  them  in  Jerusalem, — 
for  forty  days,  expounding  to  them  the  wonderful 
events  that  had  transpired.  For  what  they  needed 
was  not  proof  that  he  was  dead,  and  now  alive  again, 
— for  did  they  not  see  him?  had  they  not  "held 
him  by  the  feet  and  worshipped  him  ” ? What  they 

* Pressens^,  Life  of  Christ,  p.  486. 


236  THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 

needed  was  to  comprehend  these  events, — to  see 
their  moral  import, — to  learn  how  to  connect  them 
with  prophecy  and  promise,  and  with  the  ancient  cov- 
enants and  the  redemption  which  from  of  old  had 
been  growing  up  in  the  world.  And  then  at  last  we 
see  him  in  his  disciples’  open  company,  and  in  his 
own  fully  recognized  person  ascending  before  their 
eyes  into  heaven. 

This  is  the  history  which,  in  spite  of  all  internal 
and  external  criticism,  the  Gospels  continue  to  relate. 
We  may  still  require  other  evidence  to  support  it. 
But  it  is  something  that  it  comes  forth  from  these 
books  one  consistent  and  consentient  account.  The 
rationalistic  critics  would  have  us  believe  that  the 
evangelists,  as  compared  together,  have  no  one 
story  at  all ; that  what  is  told  by  one  is  untold  by 
another,  and  that  every  great  feature  of  the  scene 
is  lost  as  soon  as  the  four  are  brought  together. 
False  as  these  allegations  are  when  applied  to  the 
Gospels,  they  are  admirable  as  unconscious  allusions 
to  the  hermeneutics  of  rationalistic  criticism.  Badly 
olf  as  Baur  conceives  the  four  Gospels  to  be,  he  would 
probably  undertake  the  harmony  of  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  and  John  with  more  hope  than  that  of  the 
rationalistic  opinions  concerning  them.  These  mod- 
ern evangelists  are  a fraternity  who  sit  like  Strauss 
and  Paulus  back  to  back,  and  their  opinions,  ranging 
over  the  whole  field  of  possible  variation,  seem  to  have 
exhausted  the  final  capacities  of  that  great  attribute 
of  freedom  which  was  once  so  much  discussed  in  New 
England,  — ”the  power  to  the  contrary.”  Meantime 
the  internal  examination  of  the  Gospels,  conducted  in 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


237 


any  fair  spirit,  leads  to  a consistent  result.  The  tes- 
timony of  the  Gospel  is  not  mutilated  with  destructive 
self-contradiction,  nor  impaired  by  important  disa- 
greements. The  main  facts  are  harmoniously  related, 
and  as  far  as  four  such  records  can  do  so,  they  give 
the  color  and  the  authority  of  actual  history  to  the 
miracle  of  the  resurrection. 

The  Scriptures  have  another  witness  of  great 
weight  to  introduce  into  this  testimony,  in  the 
Apostle  Paul.  He  comes  before  us  with  the  advan- 
tage of  an  acknowledged  and  undoubted  authority. 
The  apostolic  origin  and  genuineness  of  the  four 
Gospels  and  of  the  Book  of  Acts  have  been  vehe- 
mently assailed,  but  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  no 
respectable  author  has  ventured  a doubt  that  St.  Paul 
wrote  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans,  the  two  to  the  Corin- 
thians, and  that  to  the  Galatians.  Those  epistles  leave 
us  in  no  doubt  what  the  apostle’s  own  belief  was.  " If 
Christ  be  not  risen,”  he  writes  in  one  of  them, ''  then  is 
our  preaching  vain,  and  your  faith  is  also  vain.”  But 
Strauss  is  not  content  to  know  that  Paul  believed  in 
the  resurrection.  In  his  "New  Life  of  Jesus,”  he 
demands  to  see  his  evidence  and  to  know  why  he 
believed  it.  In  common  with  the  critics  of  the  so- 
called  Tubingen  school,  he  will  not  receive  the  Book 
of  Acts  in  evidence  at  this  point,  and  makes  his 
appeal  to  the  four  acknowledged  Epistles.  Happily, 
it  is  easy  in  this  case  to  be  generous.  The  four 
Epistles  are  enough.  They  give  us  what  light  we 
need  as  to  the  character  of  the  evidence  possessed  by 
Paul.  In  the  great  passage  in  the  First  Corinthians, 
he  says  (15:3):  "He  was  buried  and  rose  again 


238 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


according  to  the  Scriptures, — was  seen  of  Cephas, — 
then  of  the  twelve, — of  above  five  hundred  brethren 
at  once,  of  whom  the  greater  part  remain  unto  the 
present,  but  some  are  fallen  asleep,  After  that  he 
was  seen  of  James,  then  of  all  the  apostles,  and  last 
of  all  he  was  seen  of  me  also.” 

Strauss  raises  the  somewhat  ungracious  inquiry 
on  what  grounds  of  evidence  did  Paul  make  these 
assertions,  and  believes  he  can  show  that  they  are 
only  a cupful  from  the  current  traditions.  In  com- 
menting on  the  passage,  he  attacks  first  the  state- 
ment with  which  it  ends,  and  inquires  when  and 
how  the  risen  Jesus  was  seen  of  Paul.  In  reply  he 
resorts,  with  a remarkable  facility  of  " remembering 
to  forget  ” what  he  has  elsewhere  said  against  the 
Book  of  Acts,  to  the  account  there  given  of  the  con- 
version of  the  Apostle.  He  now  finds  it  for  his  pur- 
pose to  treat  this  account  as  genuine,  and  to  elicit  from 
it  evidence  that  the  appearance  of  Jesus  on  the  way 
to  Damascus  was  not  real  but  visionary.  He  is  then 
ready  with  the  critical  inquiry,  If  this  appearance  to 
Paul,  on  which  so  much  turns,  was  visionary,  why 
may  not  all  the  other  appearances  have  been  of  the 
same  character? 

But  who  does  not  see  with  what  a shuffling  of  evi- 
dence this  result  is  brought  out  ? If  the  Book  of  the 
Acts  is  good  for  the  use  Strauss  makes  of  it,  it  is  good 
for  a better  use.  If  the  narrative  of  Pauhs  conversion 
can  be  appealed  to  in  support  of  the  opinion,  that  Jesus’ 
appearance  in  the  way  was  visionary,  it  can  be  ap- 
pealed to  to  show  that  it  was  not,  and  that  he  appeared 
also  to  the  other  disciples  in  the  flesh.  If  the  Acts  is 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


239 


received  in  testimony,  the  case  is  soon  ended.  If  it 
is  thrown  out,  then  arc  we  all,  and  Strauss  with  us, 
thrown  back  on  the  unexplained  and  unimpeached 
testimony  of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  "last  of  all  he 
was  seen  of  me  also.” 

Strauss  does  not  impugn  the  honesty  of  Paul.  He 
apparently  concurs  in  the  maxim  which  may  now  be 
regarded  as  fixed,  that  it  is  "easier  to  believe  Chris- 
tianity born  of  a miracle  than  of  a lie.”  He  there- 
fore presses  the  reasons  for  suspecting  that  he  mistook 
visions  for  revelations.  Without  the  aid  of  the  Acts 
he  makes  little  progress  in  such  a solution ; and  with 
that  aid  it  is  easy  to  refute  him. 

Paul  introduces  his  testimony  to  the  resurrection 
as  something  he  had  "received.”  Strauss  fastens  on 
this  word  "received,”  connects  it  at  once  with  the 
current  traditions,  and  asks  if  there  is  any  reason  to 
believe  that  he  has  transmitted  to  us  anything  more 
credible  than  the  unexamined  traditions  current 
among  the  apostles. 

Here  arises  a dilemma.  Paul  was  once  a persecu- 
tor. He  says  so  himself  in  one  of  the  unquestioned 
epistles.  During  this  hostile  period  the  Christian 
faith  was  constantly  before  him,  and  the  facts  on 
which  it  was  founded  ; but  he  repudiated  them.  How 
shall  we  account  for  his  conversion  without  having 
recourse  to  the  Acts?  He  refers  to  the  change  in 
the  unimpeached  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  in  the 
striking  words,  " When  it  pleased  God  to  reveal  his 
Son  in  me.”  At  all  events,  some  convincing  and 
overwhelming  event  occurred  which  overturned  his 
plans  and  views,  and  made  it  impossible  to  resist  the 


240 


TEE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


new  faith.  Wliat  that  event  was,  and  what  new  evi- 
dence it  brought  into  view,  Strauss  does  not  show.  If 
this  new  evidence  was  not  furnished  by  a thorough  and 
critical  revision  of  the  facts  possessed  by  the  other 
apostles,  and  to  whicji  he  alludes  in  the  passage 
before  us, — then  it  must  have  been  contained  in  some 
new  revelation  made  to  himself,  and  which  was  of  such 
a convincing  nature  as  to  render  further  examination 
of  the  current  traditions  unnecessary.  The  doubter 
may  choose  which  alternative  he  pleases.  On  either 
hand  a mass  of  solid  evidence  will  confront  him. 

In  introducing  his  remarks  on  this  subject,  Paul 
says,  ”for  I delivered  unto  you  what  I also  received.” 
These  words  may  or  may  not  indicate  that  he  trans- 
mitted, without  examination,  the  current  traditions ; 
but  they  certainly  do  indicate  that  this  belief  was 
then  current  among  the  apostles.  They  amount  to 
an  absolute  proof  that  Peter  and  James  and  all  the 
apostles  and  above  five  hundred  brethren,  excepting 
those  who  had  died,  were  ready  to  offer  themselves 
as  eye-witnesses  to  the  reappearance  of  Jesus  after 
death. 

This  testimony  carries  us  back  nearer  to  the  begin- 
ning than  would  appear  at  first  sight.  It  is  contained 
in  an  epistle  written  about  the  year  of  our  Lord  57, 
but  refers  to  matters  with  which  the  apostle  had 
been  acquainted  not  less  than  twenty  years.  It  goes 
back  to  his  earliest  acquaintance  with  Peter  and 
James  at  the  time  of  his  conversion  and,  even  earlier 
than  that,  to  the  persecution  he  led  against  the  church 
on  account  of  this  very  belief  in  the  resurrection. 
At  that  time  he  beheld,  with  hostile  eyes  indeed,  the 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.  241 

faith  of  the  church.  Nevertheless  he  beheld  it. 
His  fury  against  it  is  a witness  of  the  faith  in 
the  risen  Saviour  which  at  that  time  glorified  Stephen 
in  death,  and  sustained  so  many  others  among  whom 
he  ” made  havoc.”  At  that  early  period,  within  a few 
years  of  the  resurrection  and  of  the  ascension,  he  first 
emerges  into  view  from  the  school  of  Rabbi  Gamaliel, 
and  from  that  day  on,  and  back  to  that  day,  he  is 
an  original  and  unimpeached  witness  to  the  fact 
that  the  apostles  and  all  the  church  believed  in  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus.  On  this  point  Paul  is  as 
good  a witness  as  if  he  had  stood  by  the  vacant 
tomb  of  Jesus,  and  in  some  respects  he  enjoys  a 
decided  advantage  over  his  brethren.  For  it  must 
be  remembered  that  he  studied  Christianity  first 
as  an  enemy,  before  he  preached  it  as  an  apostle. 
At  what  age  he  entered  the  school  of  Gamaliel 
we  do  not  know,  nor  how  long  he  was  there  be- 
fore he  led  the  persecution  against  the  church. 
Evidently  he  was  there  for  some  time.  He  was  for- 
eign born,  and  would  not  have  been  admitted  to  the 
confidence  and  possible  membership  of  the  Sanhedrim 
without  a considerable  residence  and  acquaintance  at 
Jerusalem.  His  zeal  as  a Pharisee  could  not  have 
been  acquired  in  a Gentile  residence.  These  con- 
siderations point  to  a somewhat  prolonged  domicile 
in  Jerusalem  and  a continued  familiarity  with  the  rise 
of  Christianity  from  the  Jewish  point  of  view. 
When  Renan  says  that " to  write  the  history  of  a reli- 
gion it  is  necessary  first  to  have  believed  it  . . . 
and  in  the  second  place  to  believe  it  no  longer  im- 
plicitly,”''^ he  writes  the  unconscious  indorsement  of 
♦ Introduction,  Life  of  Jesus. 


242 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


the  apostle  Paul  as  a witness  to  Jesus.  To  give  tes- 
timony in  the  great  controversy  of  fact  between  the 
Jew  and  the  Christian,  Paul  was  exactly  this  man. 
When  he  states  the  facts,  he  does  so  with  a full 
knowledge  of  the  countervailing  evidence  possessed 
by  the  Sanhedrim.  On  more  than  one  occasion  he 
alluded  to  the  notorious  and  uncontradicted  character 
of  these  facts,  and  spoke  as  one  who  had  known  the 
court  secrets  of  the  temple  and  was  aware  that  they 
contained  nothing  to  rebut  what  the  Christian  party 
put  in  evidence.  As  the  question  between  the  church 
and  its  enemies  was  one  of  fact,  and  was  placed  in 
that  light  by  the  apostle  Paul  himself,  and  made  to 
turn  on  the  evidence  that  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead, 
his  previous  acquaintance  with  the  Jewish  view  of 
the  case  gives  a truly  judicial  importance  to  his 
summation  of  the  evidence  contained  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians. 

I pass  next  to  the  indirect  evidence  of  Scripture, 
from  which  it  is  my  intention  only  to  select  a few  of 
the  more  important  portions.  I appeal  first  to  the 
evidence  of  those  Christian  institutions  which  have 
come  down  from  primitive  time, — the  church,  the 
Lord’s  supper,  and  the  Lord’s  day. 

Examine  first  the  standing  evidence  of  the  church. 
There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  Christian  church 
was  founded  at  the  time  indicated  in  the  Book  of 
Acts.  With  all  his  unwillingness  to  admit  the  fact, 
I understand  Strauss  to  surrender  the  point,  and  leave 
this  chronological  landmark  essentially  undisturbed. 
We  are  able  then  to  say,  with  no  respectable  contra- 
diction against  us,  that  the  Christian  church  was 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


243 


founded  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, — fifty  days  after 
the  crucifixion,  and  ten  days  after  the  time  set  for 
the  resurrection. 

This  was  not  an  unmeaning  event.  This  founded 
church  means  something.  It  is  a monument  covered 
with  the  belief  of  its  members  in  the  great  facts  of 
Christian  history,  and  especially  that  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. If  we  are  searching  for  original  evidence  of 
this  event,  nothing  more  explicit  or  more  convincing 
could  be  desired  than  such  a monument  as  this, 
whose  very  stones  are  a testimony,  and  whose  founda- 
tions were  laid  while  the  evening  dew  and  the  morn- 
ing glory  of  the  resurrection  were  yet  fresh  on  them. 

The  strain  of  this  argument  falls  on  the  question, 
When  was  the  church  founded  ? and  on  a point  of  so 
much  importance  something  more  requires  to  be  said. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Book  of  the  Acts  assigns 
this  date  to  the  origin  of  the  church,  and  on  a 
point  of  this  nature  the  doubts  raised  by  the  Tubin- 
gen school  are  of  no  account.  Give  this  book  any 
date  which  a respectable  scholarship  would  fix, 
and  it  still  remains  the  earliest  record  of  apostolic 
history,  and  on  such  a question  as  the  time  when 
the  church  was  founded,  could  not  by  any  possi- 
bility be  far  astray.  Tradition,  which  grows  un- 
trusty in  details,  can  be  relied  on  for  landmarks ; 
and  even  if  the  doubts  raised  by  the  Tubingen  school 
against  the  book  were  well  founded,  its  testimony  to 
the  time  when  the  church  was  founded  would  remain 
an  evidence  of  great  weight. 

But  looking  a little  beyond  the  Book  of  Acts,  it 
is  evident  that  the  church  was  founded  somewhere  in 


244 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


the  first  century  ; but  it  was  impossible  that  it  should 
be  organized  at  any  other  time  than  in  that  brief 
period  which  was  so  full  of  the  wonder  and  glory 
of  the  reappearance  and  ascension  of  Jesus.  It  is" 
admitted  on  all  sides  that  something  took  place  after 
the  crucifixion,  and  that  this  something  was  the  origin 
of  the  apostles’  belief  in  the  resurrection.  What  this 
event  was,  is  in  question.  Strauss  denies  that  it  was 
the  reappearance  of  the  Crucified,  and  this  denial 
makes  it  necessary  for  him  to  explain  the  origin  of 
the  church  which  was  built  on  that  belief.  To  do  this 
he  resorts  to  the  hypothesis  of  some  second  thoughts 
or  intermediate  reflections,  and  supposes  that  the 
unknown  event,  whatever  it  was,  passing  through  this 
secondary  reflective  medium,  grew  into  the  sincere 
belief  that  Jesus  was  risen  from  the  dead.  But  all 
this  machinery  of  second  thoughts  about  the  matter, 
and  of  intermediate  reflections,  is  against  the  philos- 
ophy of  history.  The  creative  force  lies  in  the  origi- 
nal event  itself,  whatever  it  was,  and  not  in  subsequent 
thoughts  about  it.  The  creative  moment  is  when  the 
passion  and  the  power  of  the  event  is  yet  young. 
And  when  that  moment  has  slipped  away  it  cannot 
be  recalled.  If  the  event  which  Strauss  is  willing 
to  admit  did  occur,  is  not  adequate  to  account  for  the 
foundation  of  the  church  in  the  heat  of  its  aboriginal 
moment,  he  must  find  some  other  which  is  adequate 
so  to  account  for  it.  For  the  date  of  the  event,  what- 
ever it  was,  and  of  the  institution  that  grew  from  it, 
must  be  essentially  the  same.  Suppose  our  fathers 
had  fought  the  war  of  the  revolution  without  founding 
a government.  Suppose  they  had  concluded  a peace 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


245 


without  framing  a constitution,  and  thus  allowed 
those  fiery  and  formative  times  to  pass  into  the  era 
of  peace  ; is  it  within  the  possibilities  that  they  could 
have  done  the  work  then  ? Great  institutions  arise  in 
great  events.  The  institutions  and  the  events  are 
young  together,  and  there  is  absolutely  no  time  in  the 
history  of  the  church  when  it  could  have  been  founded 
but  the  creative  time  of  the  resurrection  and  the 
ascension. 

Turn  to  another  episode  in  the  human  history  of 
the  early  church,  — the  first  persecution;  and  here 
we  find  evidence  pointing  in  the  same  direction.  We 
are  able  to  assign  the  date  of  this  outbreak  inde- 
pendently of  the  book  of  Acts,  and  to  fix  it  not  later 
than  the  beginning  of  the  year  37.  At  this  time 
the  church  has  grown  numerous.  Its  members  are 
widely  dispersed,  and  Paul  is  riding  through  the  land 
as  far  north  as  Damascus,  persecuting  them  with  the 
utmost  violence.  Here  is  a state  of  things  which 
could  not  have  come  on  in  a day.  In  the  first  place 
the  very  numbers  of  the  church  prove  that  some  con- 
siderable time  must  have  elapsed  since  its  organiza- 
tion. Its  members  appear  already  at  Damascus  and 
at  Antioch.  This  extension  must  have  been  the 
work  of  time,  and  proportionately  to  its  breadth  car- 
ries back  the  age  of  the  church. 

But  there  has  also  been  a great  change  in  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Jewish  party.  When  the  crucifixion 
occurred,  there  was  no  disposition  to  pursue  the 
disciples.  The  Sanhedrim  rated  them  at  their  human 
valuation.  Jesus  himself  was  the  sole  object  of 
their  procedures,  and  they  were  reassured  by  his 


246 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


death.  The  disciples  were  indeed  for  a time  in 
alarm,  hnt  it  was  soon  found  to  be  a groundless 
fear,  and  they  reappeared  in  Jerusalem  with  no 
immediate  danger  of  their  lives.  The  Book  of  Acts 
shows  this  to  have  been  true,  and  other  known  facts 
prove  it.  How  otherwise  could  Peter  and  John  and 
James  have  remained  at  Jerusalem  alive  ? For  a time 
they  enjoyed  the  popular  favor.  A great  company 
of  priests  and  Pharisees  were  obedient  to  the  faith ; 
and  when  the  Sanhedrim,  aroused  by  the  progress  of 
the  church,  proceeded  to  measures  of  a mild  severity 
against  Peter  and  John,  the  people  were  found  to  be 
on  their  side. 

But  when  Paul  appeared  a few  years  later,  this 
state  of  things  was  changed  and  the  utmost  fury  of 
persecution  prevailed.  The  church  was  scattered 
abroad,  flying  in  all  directions.  Such  a change 
required  time  and  events  to  produce  it,  and  time  and 
events  which,  when  retraced,  carry  back  the  date  at 
which  the  church  must  have  been  founded.  A close 
examination  of  the  Acts  will  show  what  these  events 
were. 

First  the  Sanhedrim  allowed  matters  to  take  their 
course,  and  attempted  nothing  more  than  mild 
repression.  The  persecution  which  arose  at  last  was 
chiefly  the  work  of  the  Sadducaic  party  to  whom  the 
resurrection  was  a peculiarly  exasperating  fact.  The 
Sadducees  were  never  strong  enough  with  the  people 
to  carry  them  alone,  and  accordingly  we  find  them 
taking  advantage  of  some  commotion  raised  by  the 
Hellenistic  Zealots,  the  history  of  which  is  obscure, 
and  in  combination  with  the  extreme  wing  of  the 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


247 


Pharisees,  raising  the  storm  of  persecution.  Such  a 
movement  of  events  implies  what  in  modern  society 
would  be  called  a political  change,  — the  loss  of 
power  by  one  party  — the  inauguration  of  new  lines 
of  policy  and  the  growth  of  new  facts  to  alarm  the 
people.  The  church  must  have  been  some  years  on 
its  way  before  such  a persecution  could  have  arisen 
a2*ainst  it. 

Another  fact  bearing  on  the  same  point  is  the 
institution  of  the  diaconate.  The  persecution  arose 
at  the  death  of  Stephen,  who  had  just  been  appointed 
to  the  office  of  deacon.  This  was  a new  charge  in 
the  church,  and  arose  not  from  the  command  of 
Christ,  but  from  a want  which  gradually  made  itself 
felt  in  the  daily  administration.  The  church  must 
have  been  already  some  years  on  its  way,  and 
involved  in  the  exigencies  of  a growing  work,  before 
such  a need  could  be  felt.  First  it  had  to  become 
numerous,  and  that  to  a burdensome  degree;  then 
the  apostles,  who  at  the  outset  had  the  care  of  every- 
thing, had  to  learn  that  the  work  was  too  great  for 
them,  — and  when  we  consider  that  not  less  than 
thirteen  persons,  including  James,  bore  that  name  at 
the  time,  we  can  conclude  how  vast  the  work  must 
have  grown  in  Jerusalem  itself  before  the  plan  of  the 
diaconate  was  suggested.  Such  a measure,  when  pro- 
posed, would  require  deliberation,  and  all  these 
delays  are  so  much  age  added  to  the  church,  when 
Paul  appears,  leading  against  it  the  persecution  which 
arose  early  in  the  year  37. 

Such  considerations  as  these  ingrained  into  the 
history  — and  the  more  it  is  studied  the  more  they 


248 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


multiply  — point  unmistakably  to  the  foundation  of 
the  church  at  the  time  indicated  in  the  Acts, ^ and- 
the  raising  then  of  its  since  unbroken  testimony  to  the 
resurrection. 

Similar  in  character  and  importance  is  the  testi- 
mony of  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord’s  Supper.  To 
avoid  disputed  ground,  we  still  draw  our  evidence 
from  the  acknowledged  epistles  of  Paul.  What  he 
says  in  regard  to  the  origin  of  this  sacrament  is 
familiar  and  significant.  It  carries  its  institution 
back  beyond  the  crucifixion,  and  yet  shows  that  its 
significance  could  not  be  complete  until  after  the  res- 
urrection. A prophecy  when  first  instituted,  it  was 
quickly  adopted  by  the  church  as  a testimony  and  a 
memorial.  Its  continuity,  as  a chain  of  testimony, 
cannot  be  broken.  It  is  the  Christian  rite  in  which 
we  behold  united  in  one  moment  the  crucifixion  and 
the  resurrection.  It  is  a positive  institution  which 
spans  the  gulf  of  time,  and  carries  us  back  to  the 
upper  chamber  where  Christ  gave  this  memorial  to 
his  disciples. 

So  also  the  Lord’s  day  is  another  witness,  bringing 
to  us  as  often  as  it  occurs  with  unerring  precision 
and  unwearied  regularity,  tidings  from  the  vacant 
tomb. 

Tubingen  hears  Paul.  Let,  then,  Paul  speak ; for 
he  tells,  of  the  "first  day  of  the  week,”  and  shows  that 
was  the  Christian  day, — and  what  but  the  resurrec- 
tion made  it  this  ? 

Strauss  hears  John, — not  John  in  the  Gospel,  but 
John  in  the  Apocalypse,  and  John  speaks  there  of 
the  " Lord’s  day,” — that  he  was  " in  the  spirit  on 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


249 


the  Lord’s  day.”  But  how  could  the  Apostle  John 
call  it  the  Lord’s  day  unless  in  one  such  day  Jesus 
rose  ? 

Strauss  would  have  us  believe  that  at  the  death 
of  Jesus  the  disciples  fled  to  Galilee,  and  there,  amid 
the  familiar  scenes,  peopled  with  recollections  of 
Jesus,  his  old  form  came  back,  and  aided  by  ecstatic 
affection  formed  slowly  into  the  conviction  of  him  as 
living,  and  that  this  belief  grew  up  insensibly  on  the 
heights  of  Nazareth,  into  the  legend  of  the  resurrec- 
tion; while  Eenan,  calling  to  his  aid  rather  more 
of  conscious  fraud,  describes  how  in  that  same  re- 
treat love  and  hope,  brooding  over  the  past,  rose  into 
visions,  and  wrought  out  at  length  by  purely  psy- 
chological processes  the  miracle  of  the  resurrection. 

Divine  power  of  love,”  he  cries.  ” Sacred  moments, 
in  which  the  passion  of  a hallucinated  woman  gives 
to  the  world  a resurrected  God.”* 

A more  truly  gossamer  web  of  Action  was  never 
spun.  Apostolic  history  begins  in  Jerusalem,  and 
not  in  the  sacred  retreats  of  Galilee.  Before  there 
had  been  time  for  the  apostles’  minds  to  cool,  we  find 
them  at  Jerusalem,  en;ibodying  their  faith  in  the  solid 
matter-of-fact  but  significant  institutions  of  the  church 
and  its  sacraments.  The  date  at  which  these  posi- 
tive institutions,  with  their  testimony  to  the  resur- 
rection, were  going  on  at  Jerusalem,  is  the  best  of 
evidence  that  there  was  no  time  for  a retreat  to 
Galilee,  for  the  growth  of  fantastic  speculations  and 
unconscious  deception,  nor  for  the  formation  of  a 
visionary  faith.  ' 

* Life  of  Jesus,  p.  357. 


250 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


Had  the  apostolic  church  issued  from  Galilee, 
there  would  be  more  color  to  such  an  hypothesis. 
But  it  was  planted  at  Jerusalem,  and  at  a time  when 
the  history  of  Jesus  and  the  circumstances  of  his 
death  were  fresh  in  the  knowledge  of  all  the  city. 
And  Jerusalem  with  its  Pharisees  and  Sadducees 
and  the  dreaded  Sanhedrim  was  a disenchantment 
of  dreamers  that  would  not  have  been  lost  on  the 
apostles  of  a visionary  faith.  The  reappearance  of 
the  disciples  at  this  city,  and  their  bold  proclamation 
of  the  faith  there,  are,  when  duly  considered  in  all  of 
their  bearings,  enough  of  themselves  to  overthrow 
the  theory  of  the  mythical  origin  of  the  Gospels. 

It  remains  for  us  to  glance  at  a few  significant  facts 
of  Christian  experience  which,  without  the  resurrec- 
tion to  explain  them,  would  be  inexplicable  and 
incredible. 

One  of  these  is  the  sudden  and  remarkable  tran- 
sition of  the  disciples  from  deep  despair  after  the 
burial  of  Jesus  to  high  and  permanent  exultation. 

There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  picture 
which  the  Gospels  give  of  the  disciples  in  those 
dejected  days  was  overdrawn.  They  were  like 
men  " crushed  by  the  great  stone  rolled  to  the 
door  of  the  sepulchre.”  And  yet  the  church  was 
not  born  of  despair,  but  of  hope.  It  was  a grand 
burst  of  enthusiasm  that  laid  its  foundations.  But 
what  raised  those  bowed  heads?  What  inspired 
those  dejected  minds  ? A few  days  pass,  and  we  find 
this  aimless,  headless  company,  without  one  great 
original  mind  among  them,  without  one  leader  able 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


251 


to  originate  a plan  of  action,  or  even  to  comprehend, 
unaided,  the  significance  of  what  had  already  trans- 
pired, reappearing  in  the  temple  with  an  unconquerable 
courage,  overflowing  with  hope  and  joy,  and  full  of 
plans  for  work.  Whence  came  this?  Not  from  the 
disciples, — for  such  plans,  such  comprehension  of 
the  significance  of  events,  was  not  in  them.  The  only 
original  and  constructive  mind  the  apostolic  church 
ever  had  was  Paul,  and  Paul  was  at  this  time  a per- 
secutor. It  was  not  yet  time  for  talents  like  his. 
These  first  days  of  the  church  needed  simple  and 
childlike  minds  to  utter  only  what  was  given  them, 
and  to  reflect  the  sacred  impression  of  the  Saviour. 
Whence,  then,  this  sudden  hope  and  joy  and  com- 
prehension of  redemption  through  the  death  of 
Christ?  Whence  this  sudden  starting  up  of  the 
divine  plan  of  the  Gospel,  and  of  an  appointed 
work  and  order,  to  those  who  in  losing  Jesus  had 
lost  the  only  plan  and  aim  they  had  ever  known  ? 
Strike  out  the  resurrection,  and  who  can  reply? 
Eead  the  account  as  it  stands,  and  who  feels  a sur- 
prise at  these  features  of  the  case  ? 

Not  Ipss  remarkable  is  the  sudden  fading  out,  at  this 
time,  of  the  hope  in  the  worldly  Messiah.  So  inefface- 
able was  this  hope  that  when  Jesus  was  risen,  the  dis- 
ciples greeted  him  with  the  question,  ” Lord  wilt  thou 
at  this  time  restore  again  the  kingdom  to  Israel  ? ” But 
this  view,  which  survived  the  crucifixion  and  the  resur- 
rection, then  died  away  forever.  In  its  place  we  find 
Jesus  preached  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  in  the  char- 
acter which  he  has  held  through  all  the  subsequent 
history  of  the  church, — of  the  Saviour  of  the  world 


252 


THE  EVIDENCE  OF  THE 


from  sin.  Faith  in  his  name  was  no  longer  a title  to 
nobility  in  a messianic  kingdom,  bnt  a way  of  holi- 
ness and  a promise  of  redemption  from  sin.  This 
sudden  and  amazing  breaking  forth  of  light  from 
minds  so  blank  and  dark  before,  supposes  the  appear- 
ance of  some  great  luminous  fact  in  their  experience. 
This  change  could  not  be  spontaneous ; and,  without 
the  resurrection,  remains  as  inexplicable  as  it  is 
plain  with  it.  Strike  out  the  resurrection,  and  who 
can  show  how  Jesus,  the  Jewish  Messiah  and  tem- 
poral prince,  as  the  disciples  beheld  him  previous 
to  the  resurrection,  came  to  be  preached  on  Pente- 
cost, in  the  new  and  divine  character  of  the  world’s 
Redeemer  ? 

I have  spoken  of  the  church  itself,  as  a witness  to 
the  resurrection.  In  the  continuity  of  its  life  and 
hope  and  experience  in  Christ  Jesus  it  furnishes  a 
fact  in  evidence  which  is  wholly  inexplicable  and 
incredible,  when  torn  away  from  the  resurrection  and 
from  the  ascension  gifts  of  the  glorified  Redeemer. 
The  risen  Saviour  is  the  inner  contents  of  all  Christian 
life,  and  the  essential  power  and  victory  of  the  church. 
The  fact  that  they  exist  is  a testimony  that  He  rose. 
The  church  ascends  toward  heaven  with  the  rising 
Lord.  The  church  is,  because  Christ  lives. 

We  see  this  in  the  first  appearance  of  the  apostles 
at  Jerusalem,  and  we  see  it  in  every  other  moment 
of  true  Christian  life  since.  The  apostles  did  not 
come  forward  at  Pentecost  with  a doctrine,  but  with 
a Saviour.  They  did  not  act  as  discoverers  of  a new 
and  potent  philosophy,  but  as  disciples  of  an  ever 
living  Christ, 


RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


253 


This  original  consciousness  of  life  and  power  in 
Christ  has  continued  to  be  the  characteristic  of  the 
church  in  all  ages.  It  has  bound  together  the  divided 
sections  of  its  communion ; it  has  given  the  continuity 
of  its  succession  amid  all  the  variations  of  belief  and 
practice.  At  the  end  of  our  reasonings  we  return 
to  it,  not  so  much  as  the  rock  on  which  to  build,  as 
the  pillow  on  which  to  rest  in  peace  and  hope. 
"We  have  found  the  Messiah”  was  the  first  testi- 
mony which  one  man  ever  gave  to  another  that  the 
Son  of  God  was  in  the  world.  "We  have  found  the 
Saviour,”  is  the  testimony  in  which  myriads  of  con- 
verted souls  continue  the  testimony  to  Jesus  the  risen 
and  ever-living  Redeemer. 


IX. 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL  WORK  OF 
CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


BT  REV.  WILLIAM  £.  MERRIMAM,  PRESIDENT  OF  RIPON  COLLEGE,  WIS. 


HE  doubts  and  difficulties  of  many  persons  about 


Christianity  may  be  included  in  the  question, 
Is  it  adequate  — adequate  to  fulfil  its  own  proposals 
to  the  world? 

No  such  proposals  are  made  elsewhere.  Christ 
was  heralded  as  He  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world  ” ; no  other  proposes  to  bear  that  burden.  He 
declares  the  object  of  his  mission,  ''  That  the  world 
through  him  might  be  saved  ” ; no  other  undertakes 
that  work.  And  as  it  appears  in  his  life  and  teach- 
ings, it  is  a work  for  man,  whose  divine  benevolence, 
moral  grandeur,  and  blest  benefits  human  thought  had 
never  before  approached,  and  has  not  yet  measured. 
Christ  offers  to  man  complete  recovery  from  evil  — 
from  sin,  which  is  spiritual  and  primitive  evil,  and 
from  all  the  others,  which  are  its  miserable  conse- 
quences. He  offers  to  renovate  men,  to  educate  them 
as  children  of  God,  and  to  give  them,  thus  prepared 
for  it,  an  everlasting  and  glorious  inheritance  in  the 
society  of  all  the  holy,  called  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven. 
These  are  not  special  privileges  for  a few,  but  a com- 
mon benefaction  for  all ; not  a beneficial  provision, 


254 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD, 


255 


set  within  the  possible  reach  of  men,  but  an  actual 
work  of  recovering  them  to  righteousness  and  bless- 
edness, which  Christ  began  in  person,  and  which  he 
proposes  to  have  finally  accomplished  in  the  whole 
world. 

Having  now  in  our  view,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
world  as  it  is  at  present,  and  on  the  other,  the  im- 
measurable good  thus  proposed  to  it,  all  the  more 
reasonable  of  our  doubts  and  difficulties  about  it  will 
take  form  in  the  solicitous  question.  Is  Christianity 
adequate  to  realize  its  own  benevolent  designs  ? And 
when  a work  of  such  blest  beneficence,  which,  apart 
from  Christianity,  the  world  never  thought  of,  and 
which  the  world  evidently  could  not  do  for  itself,  is 
proposed,  reason  requires  proportionate  powers  and 
means  to  accomplish  it.  A most  reasonable  faith, 
therefore,  need  not  hesitate  at  what  is  supernatural  in 
those  powers  and  means  — neither  at  mystery  in  well 
authenticated  truth,  nor  at  miracles  in  well  attested 
facts ; neither  at  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God, 
nor  at  the  regeneration  of  the  soul  of  man.  On  the 
contrary,  in  view  of  the  ends  proposed  by  Christian- 
ity, a reasonable  faith  requires  supernatural  power  to 
effect  them,  and  some  supernatural  acts  to  warrant 
the  promise  of  their  fulfilment.  Had  this  work  alone 
been  announced,  without  any  knowledge  of  Christ, 
scepticism  itself  would  naturally  demand  a divine 
being  to  do  it, — divine  excellence  in  his  character, 
divine  truth  in  his  teachings,  and  miracles  among  his 
acts.  And  now,  when  we  consider  what  must  be 
done  in  the  soul  and  the  world,  if  our  great  Christian 
hopes  for  them  shall  be  realized,  instead  of  objecting 


256 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PEHSONAL 


to  supernatural  power  in  Christianity,  we  shall  rather 
inquire  whether  its  supernatural  power  is  sufficient ; 
instead  of  objecting  to  supernatural  transactions  in 
it,  we  shall  rather  be  concerned  to  know  whether 
these  are  adequate  to  ensure  the  completion  of  its 
benevolent  designs. 

We  are  thus  prompted  to  compare  the  personal 
work  of  Christ  in  the  world  with  his  designs,  — that 
is,  to  compare  what  he  actually  did,  with  what  Chris- 
tianity must  yet  do  in  order  to  fulfil  his  proposals. 

Admitting  the  records  of  his  life  as  given  by  the 
evangelists,  — as  the  failure  of  the  utmost  attempts 
of  sceptical  criticism  compels  us  to  do,  — neither 
reducing  nor  multiplying,  as  we  study  his  work  we 
are  almost  surprised  that  we  come,  in  some  direc- 
tions, so  soon  to  its  limits.  There  is,  apparently,  a 
great  disproportion  between  the  kind,  and  the  extent, 
of  Christ’s  personal  work,  — between  his  apparently 
unlimited  power,  and  the  very  restricted  limits  of  its 
exercise.  Indeed,  one  of  the  most  wonderful  things 
in  the  work  of  Christ,  especially  considering  his 
designs,  is  its  limitation  — that,  having  entered  the 
world  as  he  did,  on  such  a mission,  he  left  it  so  soon 
— that,  having  said  and  done  what  he  did,  he  said 
and  did  no  more. 

We  notice  the  limiting  facts  : — Christ  lived  in  the 
world  but  about  thirty-four  years ; he  was  engaged 
iu  his  public  work  but  about  three  and  a half.  He 
confined  himself  to  his  own  little  conntry ; he  did 
nothing  in  person  for  any  other.  He  worked  mira- 
cles to  authenticate  his  divine  person  and  mission ; 
but  these  proofs  were  in  various  ways  so  limited, 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


257 


that  in  his  own  times  many  denied  or  doubted  them, 
and  many  well-disposed  inquirers  have  been  perplexed 
or  doubtful  in  regard  to  them.  He  gave  to  the  world 
a new  revelation  of  God  and  the  future  life  ; but  his 
teachings  were  so  limited,  that  on  important  matters 
of  doctrine  and  practice  his  church  has  always  been 
grievously  divided,  sincere  believers  have  often  been 
in  error,  and  the  most  gifted  and  diligent  students 
have  often  failed  to  agree  on  his  meaning.  His 
training  of  his  apostles  was  so  limited,  compared 
with  their  need  of  it,  that  they  failed  to  understand 
his  personal  teachings ; they  all  forsook  him  at  his 
arrest ; they  were  surprised  and  discouraged  by  his 
death,  and  faithless  about  his  resurrection. 

The  extraordinary  work  which  Christ  did  in  reliev- 
ing suffering  and  promoting  the  physical  welfare  of 
men,  was  singularly  limited.  He  walked  on  the  sea ; 
he  stilled  the  tempest  that  imperilled  his  disciples’ 
boat.  This  is  evidence  of  a power  sufficient  to  per- 
manently mollify  the  fury  of  the  elements.  Yet 
storms  have  been  as  furious,  and  the  seas  as  danger- 
ous, since  as  before.  Even  his  great  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles  w^as  shipwrecked  thrice  on  his  missionary 
journeys,  and  for  a night  and  a day  was  floating  on 
the  open  sea.  The  infidel  with  plausibility  may  say. 
Human  art  has  done  much  that  is  now  available  for 
the  bodily  safety  of  men,  but  the  omnipotence  of 
their  professed  Saviour  has  done  nothing.  Christ 
healed  many  sick  people,  thousands  in  all,  but 
in  comparison  with  his  healing  power,  how  restricted 
was  its  exercise  ! How  many  thousands  of  the  sick 
were  not  cured ! How  many  thousands  did  not  even 


258 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


hear  of  the  marvellous  Healer  ! And  those  who  were 
healed  were  doubtless  sick  again.  The  power  which, 
with  a word,  cured  fever  and  paralysis,  might  have 
banished  these  diseases  forever  from  the  earth,  or  made 
permanent  provision  for  their  cure.  But  Christ  abol- 
ished no  disease,  gave  no  panacea;  nor  can  his 
power  now  be  successfully  invoked  for  such  miracu- 
lous healing.  The  infidel  with  plausibility  may  say. 
Human  art  has  done  much  that  is  always  available 
for  the  relief  of  suflfering  and  cure  of  disease  ; but  he 
who  is  said  to  have  exercised  miraculous  healing 
power  as  the  omnipotent  Saviour  of  the  world,  has 
done  nothing ; medicine  has  done  more  for  health  tlian 
miracles.  Christ  raised  the  dead;  in  one  case  in 
the  chamber  of  death,  in  another  from  the  bier,  in 
another  from  incipient  corruption  in  the  grave.  Yet 
those  who  were  raised  died  again.  He  had  power  to 
give  life,  yet  death  prevailed  while  he  was  in  the 
world,  and  has  since  his  resurrection  as  before. 

His  work  appears  as  limited,  viewed  in  relation  to 
its  immediate  moral  and  spiritual  eflfects.  ” The  Son 
of  God  was  manifested  that  he  might  destroy  the 
works  of  the  devil  ” ; but  while  thus  manifested, 
though  he  cast  out  devils  he  did  not  destroy  any 
great  iniquity.  He  was  the  Prince  of  Peace,  but 
he  did  not  destroy  war.  He  came  as  the  light  of  the 
world,  but  he  left  it  apparently  about  as  dark  as 
before.  He  came  that  the  world  through  him  might 
be  saved ; in  a few  years  he  went  away,  before  the 
greater  part  of  the  world  knew  he  had  been  here  at 
all,  and  he  left  it  about  as  bad  as  it  was  before, — as 
wicked  and  as  wretched. 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


259 


Why  should  Christ  thus  limit  his  personal  work  in 
the  world?  The  question  is  not  too  daring.  The 
faith  that  is  most  truly  Christian,  has  no  fear  of  rea^ 
sonable  inquiry.  The  reveyence  that  is  most  truly 
Christian,  will  never  serve  as  a shelter  for  intellec- 
tual timidity.  The  thorough  study  of  our  religion  is 
one  of  our  religious  duties,  and  everything  in  Chris- 
tianity is  peculiarly  provocative  of  study.  This 
question  confronts  us  early  in  our  inquiries ; it  is 
legitimate  and  practical ; it  vitally  concerns  our  per- 
sonal faith,  and  our  labors  and  hopes  for  the  preva- 
lence of  Christianity. 

The  limitations  of  Christ’s  personal  work  cannot 
be  explained  by  the  excellence  of  his  person,  or  by 
the  value  of  his  revelation.  On  the  contrary,  our 
question  sets  out  from  all  that  can  be  reasonably 
claimed  on  these  points.  Doubtless  he  was  the  one 
divine  and  perfect  man, — the  Son  of  God  and  of 
Man.  He  came  to  save  men  by  drawing  their  faith, 
love,  and  hope  to  his  person.  Why,  then,  should 
he  so  restrict  his  personal  intercourse  with  them? 
He  has  made  a new  revelation  of  God  and  the  life  to 
come ; but,  admitting  that  this  is  itself  sufficient,  it 
requires  to  be  taught,  and  none  can  teach  it  as  he 
who  gave  it,  — " never  man  spake  like  this  man.” 
Why,  then,  should  he  so  limit  his  personal  teaching? 
Doubtless  he  has  immeasurable  benefits  for  man,  but 
why  should  he  so  limit  his  personal  labors  in  dis- 
pensing them?  We  shall  not  find  the  explanation  in 
the  special  gifts  bestowed  on  the  apostles,  and  the 
special  work  assigned  to  them.  For  no  apostle 
could  be  what  Christ  himself  was;  and  besides, 


2G0 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


the  work  of  the  apostles  was  subject  to  similar 
limitations. 

Admitting  the  value  of  his  religion,  its  sufficiency 
for  the  soul,  its  diffusion  and  transforming  power,  it 
may  still  appear  to  some  that  the  personal  presence 
and  work  of  Christ  were  greatly  needed  in  the  world 
when  he  went  away.  Why  did  he  not  remain  to  lead 
the  conquests  of  his  kingdom  in  person?  Had  he 
remained  half  a centnry  longer,  and  visited  all  the 
nations  in  person,  we  are  apt  to  think  he  might  have 
left-  the  world  snbstantially  Christianized.  And  at 
how  many  times  in  the  history  of  the  church  has  her 
great  and  urgent  need  appeared  to  be  the  personal 
presence  of  her  Head  ? And  this  appears,  to  some, 
to  be  the  great  need  of  the  church  and  the  world  now. 
Some  think  the  effect  of  his  presence  here,  eigh- 
teen hundred  years  ago,  has  been  greatly  weakened 
by  the  lapse  of  this  long  time.  The  world,  also, 
has  greatly  changed.  Hence,  there  is  need,  they  say, 
that  Christ  should  manifest  himself  again,  resume  his 
work,  and  connect  his  religion  with  the  advanced  con- 
ditions of  modern  times.  They  would  not  have  him 
come  again  as  he  came  before,  bnt  come  as  he  left. 
They  would  not  have  the  earthly  life  of  Christ  re- 
peated,— they  would  not  have  him  endure  the  cross 
again, — but  they  would  have  him  teach  his  gospel  in 
connection  with  modern  thought ; bring  his  personal 
life  into  connection  with  modern  civilization ; and 
do,  in  the  presence  of  modern  science,  some  mighty 
works  for  the  revival  of  faith  and  the  advancement 
of  his  religion.  Some  argue  the  necessity  of  such  a 
further  personal  work  of  Christ  from  the  condition 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  TUE  WORLD. 


261 


of  the  world ; but,  of  course,  the  necessity,  that  he 
should  do  something  more  for  the  prevalence  of  his 
religion,  arises  from  the  limitations  of  what  he  has 
done ; it  implies  that  he  did  not  do  enough,  or  per- 
haps that  he  could  not  do  enough  at  that  time. 

But  Christ  evidently  limited  his  personal  work 
purposely.  His  supernatural  power  did  not  fail. 
His  mighty  works  did  not  weaken  nor  weary  it,  for 
his  resurrection  and  ascension  are  its  most  signal 
manifestations.  It  was  adequate  to  any  amount  of 
similar  work,  but  he  confined  its  exercise  to  fixed 
limits.  His  love  did  not  fail.  There  is  no  indica- 
tion that  his  benevolent  interest  in  man  declined  in 
the  least.  He  was  not  weary  of  his  work.  The 
glories  of  Heaven  did  not  allure  him  away.  He 
evinces  no  disgust  with  the  world,  no  impatience  in 
toil  or  suffering,  no  haste  in  departure.  On  the  con- 
trary, his  sympathies  evidently  increased  with  all  he 
did  and  bore.  " Having  loved  his  own  which  was  in 
the  world,  he  loved  them  unto  the  end.”  His  interest 
for  his  followers  appears  most  tender,  and  his  con- 
cern for  the  world  most  intense,  at  the  very  last.  He 
evidently  confined  his  benevolent  activities  to  the 
fixed  limits  given  in  the  facts  of  his  life. 

This  limitation  of  his  life-work  appears  even  more 
remarkable,  viewed  from  the  person  of  Christ,  than 
from  the  wants  of  the  world.  How  could  such  a 
being,  on  such  a mission,  so  restrain  his  love  and 
power  ? A very  acute  and  original  writer*  regards 
it  as  one  of  the  most  remarkable  points  in  the  char- 
acter of  Christ,  that,  possessing  such  power,  he  did 
* The  author  of  Ecce  Homo. 


262 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


not  resort  to  force  to  establish  his  kingdom.  And 
that  he  should  never  employ  it,  not  even  against  his 
most  wicked  opposers,  is  indeed  wonderful.  But 
above  the  height  of  this  wonder,  we  may  see,  a little 
farther  back  in  the  range,  another  far  higher,  and 
that  is,  that  he  restrained  his  power  in  works  of 
benevolence.  It  is  difficult  for  good  men  to  restrain 
their  benevolent  activities,  even  when  these  cannot  be 
well  employed,  or  have  ceased  to  be  useful.  How, 
then,  could  Christ,  with  his  opportunities,  forbid  his 
undiminished  love  and  power  to  do  more  for  men  ? 
The  philanthropist  or  missionary  leaves  his  work 
reluctantly,  even  when  his  strength  has  failed.  How 
then,  could  Christ  terminate  his  work  as  he  did,  and 
leave  this  sinful  world  so  soon  ? Did  he  not  weep 
over  J erusalem  as  he  viewed  it  from  Olivet  a few 
days  before  he  died  ? Did  he  not  foresee  the  abomi- 
nation of  desolation  standing  in  the  holy  place? 
Could  not  the  Prince  of  Peace  keep  the  peace  be- 
tween the  nations,  and  prevent  the  horrible  carnage 
which  he  then  foresaw  ? 

But  we  observe  that,  as  Christ  terminated  his  work 
without  any  disgust  or  impatience,  so  he  did  also 
without  any  hesitation  or  regret.  He  makes  the 
reason  evident : He  declares  that  he  had  finished  his 
work.  We  have  no  intimation  that  his  mission 
included  anything  more.  His  charge  to  the  apostles, 
and  through  them  to  the  church,  assumes  that  his 
personal  work  on  earth  was  done.  He  promises  to 
return,  but  he  gives  no  intimation  that  he  would 
come  to  resume,  at  a future  time,  a work  which  he 
then  left  unfinished.  His  limitation  of  his  work  was 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


263 


a clear  purpose  ; he  defined  it,  and  then  fulfilled  it ; 
His  wisdom  set  the  limits  to  the  exercise  of  his  love 
and  power.  A clear  perception  of  this  wisdom  is 
necessary  to  a worthy  confidence  in  Christianity. 

In  any  perfect  organism  or  mechanism,  the  limits 
of  any  part  are  determined  exactly  by  its  connections 
with  the  others.  This  is  true  of  all  the  work  of 
God ; no  part  comes  short,  no  part  overlaps.  This 
is  true  of  the  personal  work  of  Christ  in  the  world, 
arid  this  explains  its  limitations  — it  is  limited  exactly 
to  its  connections.  We  propose  to  consider- now  the 
principal  lines  of  its  connections. 

I.  The  supernatural  work  of  Christ  was  limited, 
on  one  side,  by  its  connections  with  nature. 

His  miraculous  work  was  not  antinatural  nor 
unnatural,  but  extranatural  and  supernatural.  He 
did  not  undertake  to  revolutionize  nature,  but  rather 
to  deliver  it,  as  he  does  men,  ” from  the  bondage  of 
corruption.”  He  did  not  make  any  correction  or 
criticism  of  nature ; he  denounced  nothing  in  it, 
destroyed  none  of  ^ its  forces,  amended  none  of  its 
operations.  In  doing  the  work  of  the  Redeemer,  he 
does  not,  in  the  least,  disturb  any  of  the  arrange- 
ments of  the  Creator.  He  honors  nature  as  the  per- 
fect work  of  God,  referring  to  it  freely  and  frequently 
in  all  its  departments,  for  illustration  of  the  truths 
and  operations  of  his  own  spiritual  kingdom. 

To  represent  the  miracles  of  Christ  as  violations 
or  suspensions  of  natural  law  is  very  incorrect.  He 
says,  ”I  am  not  come  to  destroy  but  to  fulfil;” 
” Till  heaven  and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one  tittle 
shall  in  no  wise  pass  from  the  law,  till  all  be  ful- 


264 


TEE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


filled.”  And  this,  which  is  true  of  the  law  given  by 
Moses,  is  equally  true  of  all  law  established  by  the 
Creator  in  the  material  and  spiritual  world,  in  the 
bodies  and  souls  of  men.  Christ  destroyed  no  law, 
he  violated  none,  he  suspended  none.  Gravitation 
remained  the  same,  while  he  walked  on  the  sea.  The 
forces  and  laws  of  the  body  remained  the  same,  when 
he  instantly  healed  the  sick  and  gave  sight  to  the 
blind.  When  I raise  my  hand,  I overcome  a mate- 
rial force,  but  I do  not  destroy,  nor  suspend,  that 
force  or  its  law.  When  I set  my  clock  forward  or 
backward,  I introduce  a power  and  perform  an  act 
that  do  not  belong  to  the  instrument,  but  I have  not 
changed  the  law  of  its  action ; to  do  that,  I must 
reconstruct  it.  In  his  miracles  of  healing,  Christ 
overcame  the  forces  of  the  body  by  a power,  mani- 
festly divine,  which  wrought  the  effect ; but  he  did 
not  displace  those  forces,  nor  derange  their  law ; for, 
when  he  withdrew  his  supernatural  power,  they 
resumed  their  operations,  just  as  before.  He  per- 
formed these  cures  in  numerous  instances,  but,  as 
compared  with  the  amount  of  disease  in  the  world, 
then  and  since,  they  were  very  few.  Now  if,  by 
his  supernatural  power,  he  had  provided  a remedy 
which  should  be  available  and  efficacious  in  every 
case  of  disease,  he  would  have  defeated  the  Creator’s 
arrangements.  If  he  had  prevented  disease  alto- 
gether, by  permanently  changing  the  action  of  natu- 
ral forces,  he  would  have  so  far  reformed  creation 
itself ; then  we  should  find  the  divine  power  of  the 
Redeemer  correcting  or  improving  the  divine  work 
of  the  Creator.  But  the  Creator’s  work  neither 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


265 


requires  nor  admits  correction  or  improvement.  The 
most  dreadful  fact  in  nature  is  death.  But  — so  far 
as  the  great  change  is  dreadful  — death  entered  the 
world  by  sin,  — death,  with  all  its  precursors  and 
concomitants.  This  is  the  natural  order ; and  this  is 
right.  Indeed  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  any  order 
in  which  these  should  not  be  the  consequences  of  sin  ; 
for  they  are  its  fruit,  growing  out  of  its  very  nature. 
To  suppose  that  they  did  not  follow,  would  be  to 
make  sin  as  good  as  righteousness,  or  to  identify 
them.  If  there  be  sin,  there  must  be  weakness, 
pain,  death;  they  are  inevitable  and  right.  We  see, 
therefore,  that  Christ  could  not  attempt  to  change 
this  natural  order,  nor  allow  his  supernatural  power 
to  encroach  on  it.  As  well  might  he  weaken  the 
moral  law,  for  this  natural  order  is  one  of  the  main 
supports  of  that  law. 

It  is  evident  that  the  prime  and  paramount  object 
of  the  supernatural  work  of  Christ  was  not  the  physi- 
cal welfare  of  men.  God  has  allowed  to  men,  in 
nature,  all  the  physical  welfare  consistent  with  the 
facts  of  sin ; and  while  these  facts  remain,  supernat- 
ural power  could  not  rightly  be  employed  to  increase 
it.  The  prime  and  paramount  object  of  his  mission 
was  to  save  from  sin.  Physical  welfare  is  included 
incidentally  in  the  process,  but  completely  only  as 
one  of  the  results.  And  the  supernatural  work  of 
Christ  was  in  strict  accordance  with  his  paramount 
object.  So  far  as  miracles  for  the  physical  welfare 
of  men  were  required  as  means  to  this  end,  though 
supernatural  acts,  they  were  not  inconsistent  with 
nature ; though  extraordinary,  they  were  not  dis- 


266 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


orderly;  for  everything  in  nature  is  ordered  with 
reference  to  the  same  general  end.  To  this  limit, 
Christ  must  employ  his  supernatural  power  in 
healing  disease,  or  in  other  work  for  the  physical 
good  of  men,  but  not  further.  Beyond  this,  all  such 
employment  of  his  supernatural  power  would  have 
been  disorganizing  and  destructive. 

We  can  show  that  the  work  of  Christ  did  not  fall 
short  of  this  limiting  line.  It  was  necessary  to  his 
mission  as  the  Saviour,  that  he  should  fully  authenti- 
cate to  men  his  divine  power  and  love.  He  must 
prove  his  authority  to  forgive  sin,  and  his  ability  to 
give  eternal  life.  This  could  be  done  only  by  some 
acts,  alike  supernatural,  benevolent,  and  manifest  to 
the  senses,  — that  is,  by  miracles  for  the  body,  for 
no  others  would  answer  all  these  conditions.  And 
it  is  evident  that  Christ’s  miracles  for  the  body  were 
suflS.cient  for  this  purpose.  They  fully  manifested 
his  unlimited  power,  in  the  control  of  the  forces  of 
nature,  and  his  unlimited  love,  in  his  sympathy  with 
all  the  miseries  of  men.  Divine  power  and  love, 
two  great  qualifications  of  the  Saviour  of  men,  were 
abundantly  evinced  in  his  miracles  for  the  body. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  show,  also,  that  Christ  did  not 
go  beyond  the  limiting  line.  The  obligation  to  do 
the  greatest  amount  of  good  forbade  him  to  go  farther 
than  he  did  in  the  use  of  his  supernatural  power  for 
the  physical  benefit  of  men.  He,  whose  word  with- 
ered the  fruitless  fig-tree,  might  have  destroyed  all 
bad  trees  ; might  have  forbidden  thorns  and  thistles 
to  grow  any  more  on  the  earth.  But  thorns  and 
thistles  were  wisely  ordered  by  the  Creator  to  follow 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IK  THE  WORLD. 


267 


sill,  and  while  sin  is  in  the  world,  they  will  always 
grow  in  some  form ; they  will  be  needed,  and  Christ 
would  not  forbid  them.  He,  whose  blessing  on  a 
few  loaves  made  them  sufficient  to  feed  thousands, 
might  have  so  blessed  the  earth,  that  its  spontaneous 
production  should  always  be  sure  and  abundant  for 
all.  Thus  he  might  have  prevented  hunger,  the 
hardships  of  labor,  and  the  fear  of  want.  But  to  do 
this,  while  sin  prevailed  in  the  world,  would  be  to 
undo  the  sentence  pronounced  against  sm  at  first, 
and  that  sentence  was  most  wise  and  merciful,  as 
well  as  just.  The  Eedeemer  must  not  revoke  it  nor 
interfere  with  it.  Possibly  Christ  might  have  driven 
all  diseases  from  the  world  with  his  rebuke,  as  he  did 
the  fever  from  Peter’s  wife’s  mother.  But  had  sin 
been  left,  this  would  have  been  no  benefit ; indeed, 
sin,  and  other  miserable  consequences  of  sin,  such  as 
violence,  and  suffering  in  other  forms,  would  have 
been  all  the  worse  for  such  relief.  Christ  might  have 
made  the  seas  everywhere  safe,  the  air  salubrious, 
the  land  fertile ; but,  while  men  were  morally 
unchanged,  this  would  be  only  ruinous  encourage- 
ment to  sin.  All  the  natural  arrangements  of  the 
world  conform  to  the  facts  of  sin,  and  this  order  is'* 
perfectly  wise.  Nature  is  right;  thorns  and  thistles, 
toil,  peril,  pain,  disease,  and  death,  are  right.  They 
are  all  God’s  ministers  of  discipline  and  mercy  in  a 
world  of  sin,  and  Christ  would  not  interfere  with 
their  ministry.  They  are  all  necessary  as  monitors, 
restraints,  or  correctives.  Even  death  is  indispensa- 
l)le  while  sin  prevails  in  the  world.  The  early  death 
of  wicked  men  is  sometimes  the  only  seasonable 


268  THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 

relief  of  society  from  their  iniquities.  If  Christ  had 
employed  his  supernatural  power,  without  any  limi- 
tation, for  the  removal  of  physical  evils,  the  world 
being  still  in  sin,  or  had  gone  beyond  the  limit  which 
he  fixed,  even  though  his  objects  had  apparently  been 
benevolent,  and  he  had  been  led  by  his  sympathies, 
he  would  have  misused  his  power  — he  would  have 
turned  it  all  to  evil,  — he  would  not  have  been  the 
great  Saviour,  but  a great  destroyer. 

Christ  evinced  his  divine  power  and  love,  two  great 
qualifications  of  the  Saviour  of  men,  by  his  miracles 
for  their  physical  good.  He  evinced  his  divine  wis- 
dom, the  third  qualification,  less  conspicuously  per- 
haps, but  not  less  certainly,  by  his  limitation  of  this 
miraculous  work. 

Let  it  not  be  objected  that  this  argument,  if  valid, 
would  prohibit  all  the  sciences  and  arts  of  physical 
good,  and  forbid  all  efibrts  for  human  welfare,  except 
such  as  are  directed  to  moral  improvement.  For 
these  are  not,  and  never  can  be,  violations  of  natural 
law.  Nature  contains  many  alleviations  and  partial 
remedies  for  physical  evils,  and  many  latent  resources 
for  physical  good.  The  study  and  use  of  these  is 
every  way  salutary.  But,  in  all  his  acts  of  physical 
good,  man  must  keep  to  nature.  Whatever  his  dis- 
coveries or  contrivances,  he  cannot  go  beyond  her 
for  it;  he  must  take  her  forces  and  laws,  and  no 
others.  Whatever,  therefore,  man  may  acquire  in 
science  and  art,  it  is  certain  he  never  will  break, 
disturb,  or  escape,  the  connections,  which  God  has 
established  in  nature,  between  sin  and  physical  evil. 
Whatever  art  may  do,  there  will  always  be  perils  for 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


2G9 


which  it  cannot  provide.  Whatever  alleviations  or 
delays  it  may  secure,  it  will  always  be  finally  impo- 
tent before  disease  and  death.  However  skilful  it 
may  become,  it  will  never  exempt  the  glutton  or 
drunkard  from  the  natural  consequences  of  his  vices. 
Science,  if  true,  is  a statement  of  the  work  and  laws 
of  God;  art,  if  useful,  is  subordinate  to  both.  We 
conclude  therefore,  that  the  limitation  of  the  personal 
work  of  Christ  does  not  logically  forbid  the  studies 
and  arts  of  physical  welfare,  but  that  it  logically 
subordinates  them  all  to  man’s  higher  interests. 

But  it  may  be  suggested,  that,  without  making  the 
physical  good  of  men  his  paramount  object,  and 
without  interfering  with  the  wise  order  of  nature, 
Christ  might  have  done  far  more  than  he  did  for  this 
welfare,  as  means  to  the  higher  good  that  he  sought. 
This  is  supposable.  For  instance,  his  knowledge  may 
have  been  sufficient  to  have  given  to  the  world,  at 
once,  all  the  useful  discoveries  and  inventions  made 
since  his  time.  But  would  such  work,  extraordi- 
nary though  not  miraculous,  have  been  wise? 
Would  it  have  contributed  to  the  paramount  object 
of  his  mission,  which  is  really  inclusive  of  all  human 
good?  Evidently  not.  Firsts  Because  the  means 
of  physical  good  cannot  wisely  be  given  to  men  all 
at  once,  and  apart  from  the  conditions  of  the  re- 
ceivers. Thus  given,  they  would  not  be  beneficial. 
There  is  a divine  providence  in  all  man’s  material 
progress.  Every  discovery  and  invention,  every  step 
in  it  all,  has  its  preparation,  its  time,  place,  and  con- 
nections, in  which  alone  it  is  fitting  and  useful.  And 
Christ  would  not  infringe  this  wise  order  of  provi 


270 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


deuce.  Secondly,  The  increase  of  material  means,  or 
of  knowledge,  does  not  increase,  on  the  whole,  the 
physical  good  of  men,  unless  there  is  also  a propor- 
tionate increase  of  virtue.  In  the  hands  of  iniquity 
they  are  equally  increased  means  of  evil.  Firearms 
serve  the  invaders  quite  as  well  as  the  defenders  of 
a country ; the  assassin  quite  as  well  as  the  police. 
The  mariner’s  compass  serves  piracy  quite  as  well 
as  commerce.  Labor-saving  machinery,  when  con- 
trolled by  avarice,  becomes  machinery  for  oppressing 
labor.  The  increase  of  a nation’s  wealth  is  no  pre- 
ventive of  pauperism,  for  its  pauperism  and  wealth 
are  sometimes  found  to  increase  in  the  same  ratio. 
Thirdly,  The  increase  of  material  good  alone  is  not 
certain  to  be  the  means  of  moral  improvement,  but 
is  more  likely  to  be  the  means  of  deterioration. 
Some,  who  labor  exclusively  to  increase  it,  are 
indeed  great  benefactors  ; but  they  are  such,  only  as 
others  labor  for  the  increase  of  virtue.  He  who 
would  make  bad  and  miserable  people  better  and 
happier,  by  relieving  their  pains  and  providing  for 
their  wants,  may  do  too  much  as  well  as  too  little 
for  his  object,  and  find  himself  ministering  to  selfish- 
ness, vice,  and  greater  misery.  Only  as  this  material 
service  is  connected  with  moral  and  spiritual  work, 
does  it  become  beneficial.  It  must,  therefore,  be 
limited  by  that  connection.  The  wise  man  seeks  to 
observe  that  limit  in  his  philanthropy ; we  have  every 
reason  to  believe  Christ  did  observe  it  perfectly  in 
his. 

For  we  notice  specially  : That  Christ  connected 
all  his  physical  benefits  with  his  teaching,  so  that 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  TUB  WORLD, 


271 


they  illustrated  it,  verified  its  authority,  and  re- 
vealed its  great  object.  He  also  connected  all  these 
physical  benefits  closely  with  spiritual  acts.  Thus 
he  called  out  the  blind  men’s  faith,  as  he  restored 
their  sight,  saying  before  the  act,  Believe  ye  that  I 
am  able  to  do  this  ? ” and  in  the  act,  " According  to 
your  faith  be  it  unto  you.”  In  healing  the  palsied 
man,  he  said,  ''Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee.”  Thus 
all  his  miraculous  works  for  the  body,  besides  proving 
his  power,  expressing  his  tender  concern  for  our 
present  interests,  and  sustaining  his  doctrine  of  the 
resurrection,  were  also  significant  of,  and  tributary 
to,  his  paramount  spiritual  design. 

n.  The  personal  work  of  Christ  in  the  world  was 
limited,  purposely,  so  as  best  to  engage  and  foster  a 
worthy  faith. 

Christianity  is  addressed  peculiarly  and  pre-emi- 
nently to  faith.  It  rouses  the  intellect,  and  supplies 
it  abundantly  with  truth ; it  sets  before  us  the  end 
of  our  being,  and  the  great  law  of  life ; it  is  related 
to  all  our  interests.  But  Christianity  is  peculiarly 
the  religion  of  restoration;  it  brings  divine  mercy 
and  gracious  help  for  the  sinful  and  lost ; to  restore 
them  to  spiritual  integrity  and  communion  with  God, 
to  prepare  them  for  the  estate  of  his  children  ; and  it 
must,  of  course,  be  adefressed  to  faith  as  its  corre- 
sponding receptive  exercise.  Christ  presented  him- 
self among  men,  as  their  divine  and  all-sufficient 
Deliverer,  and,  actually  entering  on  his  work,  he 
called  for  their  confidence.  Thousands  of  believers 
answered  with  glad  and  trusting  hearts.  But  he  met 


272  THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 

infidelity;  and — always  essentially  the  same  — it 
was  as  strong,  as  varied,  and  as  arrogant,  when  he 
personally  confronted  it,  as  it  has  ever  been  since. 
His  biographies  record  the  facts  of  infidelity  that 
appeared  in  connection  with  his  personal  ministry,  as 
fully  as  those  of  discipleship. 

Here  we  meet  a limitation  in  his  work,  which  is 
very  unexpected,  and,  at  first,  may  be  perplexing. 
We  are  apt  to  suppose,  that,  when  Christ  personally 
met  infidelity,  he  would  clear  it  all  away  — that,  if 
it  could  withstand  his  teaching  and  the  manifestations 
of  his  personal  excellence,  he  would  overcome  and 
subdue  it  by  special  displays  of  miraculous  power. 
But  he  did  not.  He  corrected  the  errors  of  inquirers, 
he  confuted  objections,  he  argued  with  opposers,  he 
silenced  the  questioners  that  came  to  entangle  or 
accuse  him ; but  all  this  was  in  the  ordinary  course 
of  his  work.  He  worked  no  miracles  to  overcome 
and  subdue  the  infidelity  that  resisted  his  teachings 
and  personal  excellence.  The  villagers  of  Nazareth, 
who  were  offended  at  him,  notwithstanding  his  mani- 
fest wisdom,  and  whose  unbelief  was  so  unreasonable 
that  he  marvelled  at  it,  expected  him  to  do  such 
miracles  there,  as  he  had  done  at  Capernaum.  ''But 
he  did  not  many  mighty  Works  there  because  of  their 
unbelief.’’  This  did  not  prevent  the  possibility,  but, 
in  his  view,  it  did  prevent^  the  propriety,  of  special 
miraculous  works  there ; he  would  not  crush  that 
infidelity  with  additional  miracles  for  the  purpose. 
When  arraigned  before  the  Sanhedrim,  he  did  not 
call  a sign  from  heaven,  to  prove  to  those  unbelieving 
priests  and  rulers  that  he  was  the  Messiah.  When 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IK  THE  WORLD: 


273 


presented  before  Herod,  the  king  hoped  he  would 
work  a miracle  in  his  presence  ; but  he  did  nothing 
and  said  nothing.  When  he  was  on  the  cross,  the 
unbelieving  people,  and  even  the  chief  priests, 
scribes,  and  elders,  who  gratified  their  cruel  hostility 
by  gazing  on  his  agonies,  derided  his  weakness  and 
said,  ”He  saved  others  ; himself  he  cannot  save.  If 
he  be  the  King  of  Israel,  let  him  now  come  down 
from  the  cross,  and  we  will  believe  him.”  His  whole 
public  life  was  filled  with  the  most  conclusive  proofs 
of  his  divine  mission,  which  they  could  not  deny,  but 
would  not  admit;  some  of  which  were  miracles 
greater  than  the  act  which  they  then  demanded. 
But  just  as  he  was  dying,  the  infidelity  of  the  nation 
challenged  Christ  to  this  definite  sign,  and  pledged 
faith  on  its  performance.  He  did  not  come  down 
from  the  cross ; he  made  no  answer  to  the  challenge. 
Did  the  nails  hold  him  there  ? Nay  ; rather  he  held 
on  to  the  nails. 

Christ  was  frequently,  and  sometimes  most  se- 
verely, tempted  to  overcome  infidelity  by  miracles 
for  that  special  purpose.  He  was  conscious  of  ample 
power;  his  refusal  thus  to  use  it  exposed  him  to 
misrepresentation ; he  was  anxious  that  truth  should 
prevail ; he  well  knew  the  influence  of  the  unbelief 
of  leading  men ; he  was  taunted  with  weakness  ; he 
was  challenged  by  his  enemies ; but  he  never  con- 
sented. In  this  restraint  of  his  power,  we  find  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  facts  of  his  life.  And,  judg- 
ing from  his  life,  if  he  were  now  in  the  w^orld  again, 
engaged  in  the  same  mission  as  before,  all  the  infi- 
delity in  the  land,  with  all  the  modern  advantages 


274 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


which  it  claims,  with  all  its  boasts  of  science,  with 
all  its  taunts  of  the  weakness  of  Christianity,  aided 
by  all  the  doubts  and  fears  of  half-hearted  Christians, 
would  not  be  able  to  provoke  from  him  any  miracles 
for  its  special  confutation. 

Why  did  he  thus  limit  himself?  Because,  beyond 
a reasonable  amount,  additional  evidence,  even 
though  miraculous,  has  no  effect  on  unbelief  except 
to  increase  and  confirm  it.  Where  unbelief  demands 
more  than  is  reasonable,  it  can  resist  all  it  demands. 
The  labors  of  Christ  were  public;  all  who  wished 
could  attend  his  teachings  and  witness  his  mighty 
works.  These  had  been  performed  in  all  parts  of 
the  land,  in  the  most  public  places,  in  Jerusalem,  in 
the  temple  itself,  before  multitudes  of  people.  There 
were  witnesses  of  them  at  the  crucifixion.  The  rulers 
well  knew  the  facts ; many  of  them  were  personal 
witnesses.  The  empty  sepulchre  of  Lazarus  was  not 
very  far  from  the  cross.  Lazarus  himself,  and  many 
who  were  present  at  his  resurrection,  were  witnesses 
of  his  power.  But  unbelief  of  Christ  was  as  preva- 
lent, when  he  was  personally  present,  engaged  in  his 
work,  even  when  he  healed  the  sick  and  raised  the 
dead  in  the  sight  of  multitudes,  as  it  has  ever  been 
since,  as  his  faithful  histories  plainly  show.  He 
might  have  silenced  its  cavilling  voice  and  paralyzed 
its  persecuting  hand,  for  the  time,  by  some  special 
acts ; but  it  would  have  been  still  unchanged  in  the 
hearts  of  unbelievers,  and  his  special  work  against  it 
would  have  been  no  advantage,  but  rather  a disad- 
vantage to  his  religion.  Had  he  come  down  from 
the  cross,  his  enemies  would  have  crucified  him 


WOBK  OF  CURIST  IN  THE  WORLD- 


275 


again.  He  would  have  performed  a conspicuous,  but 
useless,  miracle  at  the  cowardly  challenge  of  an 
unbelief  so  perverse  as  to  be  nothing  different  from 
monstrous  wickedness.  His  refusal  to  comply  with 
its  demand,  then,  as  always,  however  tempted,  was 
an  act  far  greater  than  such  a miracle.  This  reveals 
his  transcendent  excellence ; it  is  the  unparalleled 
instance  of  patience ; it  proves  that  his  self-control, 
wisdom,  and  fidelity  to  his  mission,  were  as  great  as 
his  power ; it  proves  that  his  love  could  not  fail  in 
any  suffering.  This  limitation  of  his  work,  toward 
infidelity,  is  one  of  those  less  conspicuous,  but  really 
pre-eminent  facts,  which  prove  Christ  worthy  of  an 
unlimited  faith. 

While  Christ  limited  his  work,  on  one  side,  toward 
unbelievers,  so  as  to  deny  their  unreasonable 
demands,  he  limited  it  also,  on  the  other,  toward 
believers,  so  as  to  allow  freedom  for  faith,  and  to 
require  its  vigorous  exercise.  Where  there  is  faith, 
there  must  be  room  for  doubt ; and,  till  faith  becomes 
perfect,  it  is  opposed  by  doubt,  and  grows  by  over- 
coming it.  Now  Christ  did  not  attempt  to  prevent 
the  possibility  of  doubt;  he  left  it  room  enough. 
He  did  not  conceal  the  difficulties  of  his  doctrines 
and  precepts ; he  did  not  explain  the  mysteries  that 
he  revealed ; some  of  his  statements  were  obscure, 
some  paradoxical,  many  very  difficult  to  be  under- 
stood and  believed.  His  conduct  often  disappointed 
or  perplexed  his  followers.  But  he  did  not  hasten 
to  render  them  special  relief ; he  made  no  attempt 
to  do  something  for  every  case  of  doubt.  He  was 
exceedingly  gentle  and  helpful ; but  he  did  not  treat 


276 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


a sickly  faith  with  effeminate  indulgence,  not  even 
though  his  disciples  abandoned  him.  He  could  nur- 
ture faith,  even  though  it  were  small  as  a grain  of 
mustard  seed,  but  it  must  he  seed,  not  chaff.  He  did 
nothing  to  exempt  believers  from  the  struggles  with 
doubt,  which  naturally  occur  in  their  recovery  from 
sin ; nothing  to  allow  in  their  faith  either  carelessness 
or  presumption  ; nothing  to  lessen  the  necessary  ex- 
posure and  exercise  by  which  faith  becomes  vigorous. 

Christ  engaged,  and  fostered,  the  faith  of  men, 
by  presenting  himself  to  them  in  his  proper  work  as 
their  Saviour.  As  soon  as  he  presented  his  person 
and  began  his  work,  he  revealed,  and  at  the  same 
time  supplied  their  real  need.  This  called  for  faith; 
and  for  more  and  more,  as  he  continued  to  reveal 
and  supply  their  need.  He  brought  to  men  divine 
light,  love,  and  help  ; he  made  these  manifest  in  his 
person,  and  in  his  personal  service  for  those  who 
would  receive  it.  He  made  it  evident  that  he  re- 
vealed God,  that  he  had  authority  to  forgive  sin,  and 
power  to  give  eternal  life ; and  he  claimed  a confi- 
dence proportioned  to  his  powers  and  benefits.  He 
presented  himself  as  the  suflScient  object  of  every 
man’s  unlimited  trust  and  love;  and  the  reasons, 
evidences,  motives,  and  even  the  spirit,  of  the  faith 
that  he  required,  and  that  every  man  needs  to  exer- 
cise, all  appeared  in  his  person  and  personal  work. 
But,  beyond  his  proper  work  as  the  Saviour  of  the 
sinful  and  lost,  he  made  no  additional  effort,  either 
to  remove  the  difficulties  of  believers,  or  to  overcome 
the  opposition  of  unbelievers.  Herein  he  commends 
himself  to  every  reasonable  mind ; indeed,  this  limi- 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IJST  THE  WORLD, 


277 


tation  of  his  work,  fairly  considered,  makes  one  of 
the  strongest  elaims  to  faith. 

If  the  work  of  Christ,  thus  limited,  was  sufficient 
for  the  faith  of  his  eontemporaries,  then  it  is  for  ours. 
It  appeared  only  in  parts  to  most  of  them ; it  is  a 
complete  whole  to  us.  It  appeared  sudden  and  some- 
times bewildering  to  them ; it  appears  to  us  with  all 
the  tests  of  time,  study,  opposition,  practical  benefits, 
and  varied  connection  with  human  experience,  for 
eighteen  centuries.  Nor  does  this  historic  distance 
reduce  the  evidences.  For,  of  all  the  clear  and 
strong  lines  of  history  running  from  his  times  to 
ours,  by  far  the  clearest  and  strongest  spring  out 
of  the  life  of  Christ.  And  present  facts  show  that 
his  life  was  never  more  potent  with  men  than  it  is 
to-day. 

We  walk  about  and  do  our  business  in  the  light  of 
the  sun;  we  paint  our  pictures  in  his  rays,  with 
hardly  a thought  of  his  distance.  But  when  we  do 
think  of  it,  the  light  is  not  less  bright  and  useful, 
while  the  distance  reveals  to  us  the  magnitude  and 
power  of  that  great  luminary.  So  it  is  with  the 
present  influence,  and  the  historic  distance,  of  the 
life  of  Christ. 

We  conclude  that  Christ  limited  his  work,  pur- 
posely, and  against  all  temptations  to  extend  it,  at 
the  line  where  it  meets,  in  all  times,  a reasonable 
and  worthy  faith  ; and  that  this  limitation  itself  forms 
one  of  his  singular  and  pre-eminent  claims  to  our 
faith. 

III.  In  the  revelation  and  statement  of  truth, 
Christ  limited  himself  by  its  connection  with  the 


278 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


study  and  culture  of  the  individual  Christian,  and  of 
his  church  as  a whole. 

We  do  not  refer  to  the  boundaries  of  his  revela- 
tion, beyond  which  curiosity  may  go,  but  beyond 
which  he  has  given  no  knowledge, — for,  of  course, 
there  must  be  such  boundaries  somewhere,  and  we 
have  no  reason  to  complain  of  these, — : but  we  refer 
to  those  limitations  in  his  truth,  which,  at  first,  per- 
plex us. 

The  main  truths  of  Christianity  are  made  so  plain, 
that  they  may  be  conveyed  by  proclamation;  the 
directions  are  so  plain,  that  any  may  take  them  and 
find  the  way  of  life.  Yet  Christianity  is  an  educat- 
ing revelation ; it  is  all  in  lessons,  for  study.  Those 
who  hear  the  news  and  obey  the  call  in  the  procla- 
mation, become  disciples ; and  they  never  leave  the 
school,  never  finish  the  study.  The  same  is  true  of 
the  whole  church.  This  is  the  nineteenth  century 
of  her  schooling  in  the  same  Christian  lessons. 
Now  these  lessons  have  been  remarkably  successful 
in  securing  study.  What  infinite  exercise  of  the 
human  soul  over  Christ’s  sayings,  ever  since  he 
uttered  them  ! What  harvests  of  thought  and  spirit- 
ual excellence  from  that  seed  ! And  his  words  are 
still  as  engaging  as  ever;  they  are  not  likely  to 
interest  less  in  the  future.  The  attainments,  made 
by  the  single  disciple,  or  by  the  whole  church,  are 
only  steps  to  the  further  progress  that  these  teach- 
ings require.  All  must  admit  their  unlimited  intel- 
lectual and  spiritual  fruitfulness. 

But  we  must  also  admit,  that  there  have  always 
been  among  Christians  great  perplexity  and  differ- 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


279 


eiices  about  these  truths.  The  most  studious  and 
dovoAt  persons  have  often  been  in  error  about  them. 
Sincere  and  learned  teachers  have  misinterpreted 
them.  The  church  has  always  been  divided,  often 
distracted,  sometimes  in  bitter  controversy  about 
them.  And  the  natural  consequences,  weakness,  infi- 
delity, fanaticism,  and  oppression,  have  been  abun- 
dant. Now  it  is  probably  true,  that  a few  additional 
or  explanatory  words  from  Christ  might  relieve  this 
disciple’s  perplexity,  or  clear  away  that  one’s  error, 
or  even  settle  some  great  question  that  has  divided 
the  church.  A few  additional  chapters  in  the  New 
Testament  might  have  prevented  many  of  the  diffi- 
culties, mistakes,  and  disputes,  which  have  arisen 
from  it  as  it  stands.  Why,  then,  did  Christ  so  limit 
his  teachings  ? 

Here,  we  observe,  that  Christ  anticipated  all  these 
troublesome  consequences  ; indeed  the  same  occurred 
under  his  own  personal  teaching.  He,  indeed,  re- 
lieved perplexity,  corrected  error,  and  settled  dis- 
puted questions,  as  he  taught;  but  his  ^teaching 
occasioned  other  perplexities,  errors,  and  disputes, 
which  he  did  not  thus  terminate.  And  now  we 
answer  our  question : Christ  limited  his  teachings, 
in  the  interest  of  education,  so  as  to  connect  them 
best  with  man’s  study  and  discipline. 

It  does  not  follow,  because  additional  teachings 
might  prevent  this  or  that  perplexity  or  error,  that 
there  might  be  additional  teachings  enough  to  prevent 
all  perplexity  and  error.  For  the  liability  to  these 
lies  in  the  conditions  of  the  pupil,  and  it  will  remain, 
whatever  the  text-book.  The  attempt,  by  the  teacher. 


280 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


to  prevent  the  possibility  of  their  occurrence,  would 
destroy  the  educational  value  of  his  teaching.  The 
New  Testament  could  not  be  made  large  enough  for 
this  purpose ; and,  if  it  could,  it  would  be  good  for 
nothing  as  the  text-book  for  training  the  soul.  Per- 
j)lexity,  error,  and  differences  of  view,  are  common 
incidents  in  the  best  educational  processes ; and, 
when  sinful  man  becomes  the  disciple,  to  be  trained 
to  the  ends  and  with  the  truths  that  Christ  sets  before 
him,  they  will  all  certainly  appear  in  the  process. 
And  Christ  was  too  wise  a teacher  to  weaken  the 
educating  power  of  the  truth  he  taught,  by  attempt- 
ing to  prevent  any  results  incidental  to  its  best 
effects.  Let  it  be  remembered,  that  his  object  is  not 
to  prevent  difficulties  and  mistakes  in  learning,  but 
to  recover  man  to  holiness.  The  pupil’s  factor  is  as 
essential  to  this  product  as  the  teacher’s  ; and  it  con- 
sists of  all  his  mental  and  spiritual  activity.  This 
must  not  be  limijted,  because  its  action  is  imperfect. 
The  teacher  cannot  do  all  the  work,  because  the  pupil 
does  imperfect  work,  because  he  is  from  time  to  time 
perplexed  or  mistaken.  On  the  contrary,  the  teacher 
must  limit  his  own  work  to  the  line  of  greatest  effect 
on  the  energies  of  his  pupil^ 

We  do  not  undertake  to  show,  that  the  actual  limi- 
tations of  the  teachings  of  Christ,  exactly  coincide 
with  this  line.  It  may  be  impossible,  and  it  is  not 
necessary  , to  prove  this.  The  truth  Christ  taught, 
in  the  limits  and  forms  in  which  he  left  it,  has  im- 
mense power  on  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men.  If 
they  become  subject  to  the  truth,  this  is  all  most 
efficient  and  salutary  educating  power.  We  show 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


281 


the  wisdom  of  Christ,  in  not  impairing  the  educating 
power  of  his  truth,  by  any  attempts  to  prevent  its 
incidental  effects,  however  troublesome  these  may 
seem  to  ns  to  be.  This  is  enough  for  our  purpose. 

But  there  are  abundant  special  reasons  for  satis- 
faction with  the  limiting  forms,  in  which  Christ  has 
given  us  his  truth.  We  suggest  a few  : Some  disci- 

ples are  perplexed  on  truths  or  duties,  which  others 
see  clearly ; the  form  of  Christ’s  teaching  turns  them 
back  to  the  preliminary  lessons,  which  they  have  not 
yet  learned.  There  is  much  difference  among  Chris- 
tians on  some  points  that  are  plain  enough  in  the 
New  Testament ; the  refusal  of  further  explanation  is 
the  requirement  of  closer  study,  or  better  spiritual 
qualification  to  find  the  truth.  To  many  of  our 
religious  questions,  the  New  Testament  refuses  to 
give  any  positive  answers  : the  refusal  leads  us  to  a 
wholesome  criticism  of  the  question,  or  gives  us 
a lesson  in  patience,  or  teaches  us  not  to  dogmatize 
too  far,  — either  of  which  is  doubtless  better  for  us 
than  the  answer.  We  find  we  cannot  formulate  all 
Christian  truth  satisfactorily ; it  is  too  large  for  our 
forms ; our  Christian  philosophy  and  theology  are 
always  scanty  and  imperfect  enough  to  make  us  hum- 
ble. But  our  admiration  of  the  design  and  wis- 
dom of  Christ  is  increased  by  the  fact  that,  never- 
theless, he  does  not  give  us  a ready-made  science  of 
Christianity  to  repeat  by  rote,  but  requires  us  to 
make  our  own,  as  a part  of  our  culture. 

IV.  The  personal  work  of  Christ  on  earth  is  lim- 
ited exactly  where  it  connects  with  his  higher  rela- 


282 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


tions  to  his  people,  and  his  higher  services  for 
them. 

All  the  transactions  of  his  earthly  history  were 
necessary  to  his  mission  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world 
— the  manifestation  of  his  divine-human  person  and 
perfect  character ; his  revelation  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven,  his  mighty  works,  sinless  example,  his 
temptations,  shame,  pain,  death,  resurrection,  and 
all  the  minor  acts  and  incidents  of  his  life,  revealing 
his  participation  in  all  common  human  experiences, 
and  his  varied  and  intense  sympathies  with  men,  — 
all  this  was  necessary,  and  this  was  all  that  was 
necessary,  except  the  final  act,  to  fulfil  his  work 
here.  He  confined  himself  strictly  to  this;  he  re- 
mained on  earth  not  a day  after  this  was  done. 

The  reason  is  clear  and  decisive.  The  final  and 
crowning  act  of  this  necessary  work  of  the  Saviour 
was  the  resumption  of  his  glory,  in  his  ascension  to 
Heaven.  What  his  resurrection  was  to  his  death, 
his  ascension  was  to  his  whole  life  on  earth.  Both 
prove  his  self-sacrifice ; his  ascension  proves  his  self- 
sacrifice  in  his  incarnation  — that  his  history  was  the 
human  life  of  the  Son  of  God.  He  refers  to  it  as 
the  consummation  of  all  his  acts  and  evidences. 
''  What  if.  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  ascend  up 
where  he  was  before?’’  Now  this  same  act,  that 
completes  his  necessary  work  on  earth,  also  termi- 
nates his  stay.  The  ascension  must  follow,  to  com- 
plete the  whole,  as  soon  as  all  the  other  necessary 
transactions  of  his  life  were  finished.  The  comple- 
tion of  these,  therefore,  decides  the  length  of  his 
residence. 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


283 


Ilis  ascension  is,  alike,  the  glorious  consummation 
of  his  earthly  life-work,  and  his  entrance  on  his 
higher  and  permanent  relations  to  all  his  people. 
That  work  being  done,  his  appropriate  place,  even 
with  reference  to  his  people  and  cause  here,  is  the 
throne  of  his  Kingdom  in  Heaven.  Now  all  his  rela- 
tions to  them  are  complete  : his  earthly  work  all  set 
before  them ; the  benefits  of  it  all  available ; his 
Person,  the  object  of  their  supreme  love,  exalted  in 
his  supremacy  and  glory.  It  is  suitable  that  the 
Leader  should  go  forward  to  the  land  where  his  fol- 
lowers are  gathering.  His  ascension  draws  their 
affections  upward  after  him ; it  lifts  their  hopes  over 
the  darkness  of  the  grave ; it  brightens  the  anticipa- 
tions of  their  own  departure.  It  may  be  easy  for  a 
Christian  to  die,  to  go  to  the  w^orld  where  Christ  is, 
in  his  blessedness  and  glory ; it  would  be  very  hard 
for  him  to  die,  if  he  must  leave  Christ  here.  The 
apostles  could  not  anticipate  his  heavenly  glory, 
while  Christ  was  with  them  in  his  humiliation  and 
service.  His  discourses  about  it,  and  even  the 
bright  special  vision  of  it,  which  three  of  them  wit- 
nessed in  the  Transfiguration,  had  but  a slight  effect 
on  them,  till  after  the  ascension.  But  his  exaltation 
kindles  in  the  Christian  intense  aspiration  to  see  and 
share  his  glorious  heavenly  estate. 

And  as  Christ  is  now  in  the  place  in  which  he  ful- 
fils all  the  need  of  his  people,  so  he  is  also  in  the 
place  of  power  and  advantage  for  his  cause.  His 
ascension  and  enthronement,  where  the  advance  of 
the  Redeemed  are  gathered,  drawing  the  affections 
and  hopes  of  his  people,  in  their  struggles  here,  to 


284 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


the  glories  of  his  kingdom  on  high,  are  more  to  his 
cause  than  centuries  filled  with  continued  earthly 
service  could  have  been  without  them.  His  ascension 
to  heaven  is  one  of  the  great  transactions  for  the 
advancement  of  his  kingdom  on  earth ; his  enthrone- 
ment is  one  of  the  great  securities  of  its  success. 

It  may,  however,  be  supposed  that  Christianity 
lost  some  advantages,  though  it  gained  greater  ones, 
by  the  termination  of  his  personal  service  here.  Not 
so,  we  reply : Those  greater  advantages  were  not 
gained  at  any  such  expense.  For, 

V.  The  personal  work  of  Christ  on  earth  was 
limited  just  where  it  connects  with  that  of  his  fol- 
lowers. 

After  he  had  accomplished  what  was  essential  to 
his  earthly  mission  as  the  Saviour,  he  withdrew  from 
what  he  might  have  done  in  person  for  the  propaga- 
tion and  prevalence  of  his  religion,  and  left  the 
whole  work  to  his  people.  At  his  departure  he 
committed  the  publication  and  teaching  of  his  reli- 
gion, the  training  of  disciples  and  of  the  whole 
church,  first  to  his  apostles,  and  through  them  to  his 
followers,  in  every  age,  till  the  end  of  the  world. 
And  this,  we  claim,  was  an  advantage  to  his  cause. 

The  simple  power  of  social  diffusion  in  Christian- 
ity is  very  strong.  But  besides  this,  Christ  calls 
every  believer  to  be,  like  himself,  a minister  to 
others.  The  believer  is  prepared  for  the  service  by 
his  personal  religious  experiences,  by  his  gratitude 
and  devotion  to  Christ,  and  his  interest  in  his  king- 
dom. The  appointment  to  it  is  most  honorable  to 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD, 


285 


the  Christian,  for  the  same  service  is  assigned  to 
him,  so  far  as  he  can  take  it,  that  Christ  himself  per- 
formed. He  shares  with  Christ  in  the  toils  and  trials 
of  his  kingdom  here,  and  he  is  appointed  to  share 
with  him  in  its  future  glories.  The  great  cause  needs 
every  Christian,  and  every  Christian  needs  the  ser- 
vice ; it  is  his  employ,  discipline,  culture,  his  prepa- 
ration for  the  higher  services  and  the  rewards  of  the 
future  kingdom.  Besides  all  that  Christ  has  done 
for  him,  every  Christian  needs  to  serve  and  be  served 
by  his  brethren.  So  long  as  any  people  are  not 
Christians,  they  will  need  all  the  church  can  do  to 
Christianize  them,  and  the  church  will  equally  need 
to  do  it.  The  fellowship  of  Christian  service  among 
believers,  for  edification  and  comfort,  and  for  the 
conversion  of  unbelievers,  is  indispensable  to  the 
culture  of  every  Christian,  and  to  the  unity,  purity, 
and  vigorous  growth  of  the  whole  church.  It  is  not 
only  a wise  arrangement,  but  it  is  a part  of  Christi- 
anity ; without  it  there  would  be  no  adequate  fellow- 
ship with  Christ,  no  church,  no  Kingdom  of  Heaven. 

And  the  church  is  competent  to  all  the  work 
required  of  it  for  its  own  development,  and  for  the 
propagation  and  prevalence  of  Christianity  in  the 
world,  without  any  further  personal  work  of  Christ, 
and  without  any  more  truths,  gifts,  or  powers,  than 
he  has  provided.  Facts  clearly  prove  this : The 
church  — if  it  could  then  be  called  a church  — was 
never  so  small  and  weak  as  when,  having  gathered 
his  faithless  and  disheartened  disciples  together  after 
his  resurrection,  he  personally  committed  this  whole 
work  to  them,  and  then  immediately  left  it  wholly  to 


286  THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 

them  by  his  ascension.  The  apostles  were  among 
the  company,  but,  apart  from  their  faith  in  him,  they 
were  very  weak  and  imperfect  men.  The  mii'aculous 
powers  and  other  special  gifts,  conferred  on  them  for 
their  peculiar  work,  were  very  limited.  Yet,  in 
spite  of  all  that  Jewish  and  Pagan  opposition  could 
do,  in  less  than  three  centuries  after  the  Ascension, 
Christianity  was  the  prevalent  religion  of  the  Eoman 
Empire.  There  has  never  been  a time  when  the 
church,  if  faithful,  was  not  adequate  to  all  that  Christ 
left  it  to  do  for  itself  and  the  world. 

But  would  the  followers  always  he  faithful  to  this 
great  trust?  And  if  they  might  not  be,  was  it  wise 
to  leave  wholly  to  them  a work  so  important?  We 
answer : The  fidelity  of  the  church  is  itself  a great 
part  of  the  end  sought.  Without  this,  of  course, 
Christianity  cannot  prevail,  even  though  Christ 
should  labor  here  in  person  for  it.  And,  to  secure 
fidelity,  Christ  must  devolve  on  the  church  the  whole 
work  which  belongs  to  it,  and  the  doing  of  which  is 
essential  also  to  its  vigor  and  growth.  If  he  should 
relieve  it  of  its  work  in  case  it  should  be  unfaithful, 
he  would  abet  itg  unfaithfulness. 

The  church  has  been  unfaithful, — at  times,  very 
unfaithful.  Christianity  has  been  perverted  and  cor- 
rupted ; its  light  has  gone  out  in  some  lands  which 
it  once  illumined.  But  his  cause  similar  reverses 
when  he  was  in  the  world,  and  we  have  no  reason  to 
think  it  would  have  been  otherwise,  had  he  remained. 
Looking  backward,  the  progress  of  Christianity 
seems  slow.  There  have  been  declensions,  reverses, 
apostasies ; not  half  the  world  is  even  nominally 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IN  THE  WORLD. 


287 


Christian  now ; the  church  is  weak ; infidelity  is 
active.  The  faint-hearted  or  remiss  or  impatient 
Christian  may  wonder  why  Christ  did  not  do  more 
for  the  success  of  his  cause  before  he  went  away,  or 
wish  he  would  come  again  and  revive  faith  by  his 
personal  presence,  and  help  on  his  work  with  new 
miracles.  All  this  Christ  clearly  foresaw;  yet  he 
left  to  his  followers  all  the  service  that  belongs  to 
them.  He  gave  them  the  greatest  motive  to  faith- 
fulne-ss,  by  committing  this  great  interest  to  their 
trust.  He  knew  that  in  their  doing  this  work,  lies 
the  actual  success  of  his  religion  in  the  world ; and 
that  they  might  do  it  all,  he,  without  any  hesitation 
or  misgiving,  left  it  all  to  them  to  do.  The  historic 
vicissitudes  of  Christianity  are  revelations  of  the 
strength  of  sin,  which  it  contends  against,  and  of  its 
own  innate  power.  But  the  appeal  of  Christ  to  the 
fidelity  of  his  followers,  made  by  committing  wholly 
to  them  their  part  of  his  work,  the  obligation  and 
inspiration  of  the  work  itself,  the  fellowship  of  all 
faithful  Christians  with  Christ  and  each  other  in  it 
and  in  its  results,  are  some  of  the  most  potent 
motives  of  his  religion  — far  more  efficacious  for  its 
prevalence  than  any  additional  work  of  Christ  could 
be  without  them.  This  limitation  of  his  work,  where 
it  connects  with  that  of  his  people,  is  one  of  the  posi- 
tive advantages  of  Christianity. 

VI.  The  personal  work  of  Christ  on  earth  was 
limited,  so  as  to  connect  with  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

What  Christ  has  personally  done  is  all  objective ; 


288  THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 

it  was  done  for  men,  set  before  them,  offered  to  them. 
There  is  in  Christianity  a corresponding  subjective 
work, — a divine  work  wrought  in  the  soul,  in  and 
with  its  own  activities.  This  is  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Now  the  work  for  man  must  be  com- 
plete, that  the  work  in  him  may  be  most  effective ; 
the  sensible  presence  of  Christ  must  be  withdrawn, 
that  his  spiritual  presence  might  be  fully  realized. 
He  came  to  the  world  that  he  might  get  near  to  men ; 
he  went  away  that  he  might  get  nearer  still ; the 
paradox  is  an  accurately  stated  truth.  He  came, 
that  he  might  manifest  himself  to  the  senses ; he 
withdrew  this  sensible  manifestation,  that  he  might 
present  himself  spiritually  and  more  directly  to  the 
soul.  Now  that  all  parts  of  his  work, — of  his  per- 
sonal work  have  been  actually  fulfilled,  now  that  he 
has  actually  taken  all  the  relation  of  Saviour  to 
them, — his  whole  work  with  all  its  various  services, 
is  available,  at  once,  to  every  man,  always,  every- 
where, and  in  all  his  various  need.  Christ  is  now 
before  every  soul,  with  all  he  ever  did  and  bore,  in 
all  the  relations  he  ever  took.  The  Gospel  is  not 
the  mere  record  of  what  he  once  said,  but  his  living 
word.  His  earthly  experiences  are  not  mere  history, 
but  the  forms  which  his  perpetual  grace  to  sinful 
men  has  taken, — forms  apt  and  sufficient  for  all 
men,  in  all  times. 

While  Christ  was  sensibly  present  among  men,  his 
presence  must  be  local ; his  services  for  them  must 
be  special  and  temporary ; so  he  could  not  serve  the 
need  of  all.  But  now  that  his  bodily  presence  is 
withdrawn,  and  all  his  earthly  work  is  complete,  the 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IK  THE  WORLD, 


289 


Divine  Spirit  everywhere  enters  the  souls  of  men, 
and  Christ  becomes  spiritually  ubiquitous  and  all- 
sufficient.  All  that  he  ever  did  and  bore,  all  the 
relations  that  he  ever  took,  become  living  spiritual 
realities,  answering  always  and  everywhere  the  be- 
liever’s want.  Thus  the  work  of  Christ  was  limited, 
so  as  to  become  illimitable ; his  outward  sensible 
work  was  limited,  so  that  his  inward  spiritual  work 
might  be  illimitable. 

On  this  point  we  need  not  theorize;  we*need  not 
undertake  to  state  the  exact  relations  of  the  personal 
work  of  Christ  to  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit ; the  sim- 
ple facts  abundantly  answer  our  purpose.  He  said 
to  his  disciples,  ^'It  is  expedient  for  you  that  I go 
away,  for  if  I go  not  away  the  Comforter  will  not 
come  unto  you.”  The  Spirit’s  work  could  not  be 
done,  while  the  great  outward  transactions  of  Re- 
demption were  going  on ; these  must  be  outwardly 
complete,  then  inwardly  realized  to  men.  But  as 
soon  as  they  were  complete,  it  was  expedient  that 
Christ  should  depart.  The  results  prove  this. 
He  left  the  world ; the  Spirit  came ; then  what  a 
change  in  his  disciples  ! How  timid  the  apostles 
before  ! how  courageous  then  ! They  had  forsaken 
him  in  his  trial,  they  were  disheartened  by  his  death; 
but  when  the  Spirit  came,  they  publicly  charged  the 
rulers  and  people  with  his  murder,  and  proclaimed 
in  the  temple,  that  he,  whom  they  with  wicked 
hands  had  crucified  and  slain,  was  risen  from  the 
dead,  and  was  their  Lord  and  Messiah.  Before,  they 
had  been  so  spiritually  obtuse,  that  they  often  failed 
to  apprehend  his  personal  teaching.  Then,  they  were 


290 


THE  LIMITATIONS  OF  THE  PERSONAL 


SO  illumined,  that  all  his  teachings,  and  all  the  old 
prophecies  concerning  him,  became  suddenly  clear. 
Then,  their  words  about  him  were  far  more  effective 
than  his  had  been,  when  he  spoke  of  himself.  The 
moral  and  spiritual  transformation  wrought  by  their 
ministry,  the  first  work  after  the  Spirit  came,  was 
probably  greater  than  had  been  wrought  by  the  whole 
personal  ministry  of  Christ.  Probably  more  were 
converted  the  first  day,  than  had  been  during  his 
whole  life.  He  had  predicted  all  this  ; he  declared, 
that,  because  he  went  away,  they  should  do  greater 
works  than  his.  This  was  fulfilled,  not  in  their  out- 
ward miracles,  for  these  were  not  as  great  as  his, 
but  in  blessed  changes  wrought  by  the  Spirit  in  the 
souls  of  men. 

When  Christ  withdrew  from  the  world,  a power 
appeared  in  Christianity  far  greater  than  his  personal 
presence.  When  he  closed  his  personal  work,  a 
spiritual  work  began  in  men,  closely  connected  with 
his,  but  far  greater  than  what  he  had  effected  among 
them.  The  history  of  his  life  had  far  more  moral 
power  after  he  had  gone,  than  its  acts  and  events 
had  when  they  were  transpiring.  His  truth,  taught 
by  very  weak,  imperfect  men,  had  more  spiritual 
efficiency,  than  when  he  taught  it  originallj^  himself. 

And  this  power  was  not  temporary.  Pentecost 
has  been  repeated  many  times  in  the  history  of  the 
Church.  Christianity  has  shown  as  great  spiritual 
vitality  and  aggressive  vigor,  in  this  nineteenth 
century,  as  it  did  in  the  first.  Its  fruits  are  more 
manifest,  abundant,  and  blessed,  in  this  than  in  any 
other.  The  Gospel,  faithfully  preached,  has  now 


WORK  OF  CHRIST  IK  THE  WORLD. 


291 


more  moral  and  spiritual  power,  than  when  Christ 
preached  in  person.  There  are  disciples,  now,  who, 
by  the  power  of  the  Spirit,  do,  as  he  predicted  they 
would,  even  greater  works  than  his. 

We  conclude  that  the  personal  work  of  Christ  on 
earth  was  sufficient.  For  the  study  of  its  limitations 
reveals  pre-eminent  reasons  for  our  faith,  and  proves 
that  the  powers  of  Christianity  are  adequate  to  its 
proposals. 


; \ .y 


4 ' 


